State vs. Jason Lynn Young 2-24-2012

[Just the Fax]

If they'd asked for clothing, how could they have ever been certain afterwards that they'd been given what he actually had on? Oh, corroboration from witnesses who were with him? Welp, we have that.

The only way that would have helped with anything is if they could have gone charging into MY's apartment and snatched the clothes off his back and the shoes off his feet.

He refused to even be seen by LE, much less talk to them.

What a coward.

 

[traveler]

I disagree. Investigators failed to make any attempt to collect the clothes that Jason was wearing, or that he may have removed from his car, when he arrived at Meredith's place. I think that this is problematic when there are claims that clothing was missing. We know that clothing were missing ... including all the clothes that Jason was wearing the day that the murder was discovered. To suggest that they are missing because they bore evidence of murder seems absurd.

They are missing because they were never requested.

Weren't LE waiting for him when they arrived? Nothing was removed from the vehicle or the defense would have suggested that in the first trial. The DT never provided a reason for the missing shirt/clothes.

 

[gritguy]

Sidebar.

If I retire, that would be a great name for a joint down near the courthouse. I'll cut you in on royalties! :rocker:

 

[MyBelle]

Yeah, well, some jurors down in Florida let casey anthony walk. Some out here in California let OJ walk as well. So, I'm not always impressed by the reasoning of jurors.

But I do wonder what, exactly, was presented as evidence regarding this trip in the last trial and what, if anything, about Jason's trip back was presented at this one.

The jurors down in Florida did not let Casey Anthony walk. Just because you can't agree with their verdict doesn't mean their verdict was wrong or that Jason Young is guilty.

There was testimony at the last trial that the stop was to obtain the phone number of an attorney. Imagine that! A suggestion to obtain an attorney followed by an actual attempt to contact a competent one.

JMO

 

[Just the Fax]

Weren't LE waiting for him when they arrived? Nothing was removed from the vehicle or the defense would have suggested that in the first trial. The DT never provided a reason for the missing shirt/clothes.

Holt's biggest blunder was not asking Jay about the missing shirt in the first trial. He fully expected the question (duh).
I would love to know what crazy lie he had planned to explain that.

 

[Bottle Cap]

He refused to even be seen by LE, much less talk to them.

What a coward.

Well yeah, not like any LE could report as to his clothing.

And the whole Y family at large seems to think that look-alike clothes and shoes are pretty much good as the real thing, so it'd be awfully difficult to trust that they'd straight up hand over a bundle of clothing and have it be the real deal.

 

[gritguy]

Holt's biggest blunder was not asking Jay about the missing shirt in the first trial. He fully expected the question (duh).
I would love to know what crazy lie he had planned to explain that.

I could see not asking him, if he didn't explain it in his fairy tale testimony, but they should have made it ABUNDANTLY clear the dark outfit (I mean the one he left the hotel in on the way to murder Michelle) was not on his body, was not in his truck, and was not taken out at his mother's Therefore, he had discarded it, obviously.

 

[Bottle Cap]

The jurors down in Florida did not let Casey Anthony walk. Just because you can't agree with their verdict doesn't mean their verdict was wrong or that Jason Young is guilty.

There was testimony at the last trial that the stop was to obtain the phone number of an attorney. Imagine that! A suggestion to obtain an attorney followed by an actual attempt to contact a competent one.

JMO

Granted, I haven't been in an Applebee's in a long time cause I don't like 'em, but I don't recall them ever being the go-to place for attorney phone numbers.

 

[PoppyMcTwist]

Originally Posted by PoppyMcTwist
Bent over with hand on wall at 16", hitting victim on floor with enough force to send spatter on the walls at approximately 16" level (surrounding)....how then did he not get blood on his pants? Or did he? Just wondering.



Some of the splatter could be "cast off" blood as well. Cast off blood is a bloodstain pattern created when blood is released or thrown from a blood-bearing object in motion.

Perhaps when the killer was raising the weapon to strike her again, blood on the weapon -- bb. bat, hammer, wrench -- was cast off onto the wall. A 6-ft person's arm would allow for higher splatter than that splatter from her horrifically beaten FACE. :maddening:

Yes, but I was specifically referencing the spatter which allegedly "surrounded" the palm print found 16" from the floor.

IMO

 

[Cammy]

If I retire, that would be a great name for a joint down near the courthouse. I'll cut you in on royalties! :rocker:

That would be a good name and place for all the attorneys to hang out.

For the most part, in this case, the attorneys all seem to get along, unlike the Cooper case.
That was not the most likeable judge though.

But, in the last few days I think Klinkosum and Cummings could go a few rounds........
it could get a little heated before this is over.

No matter what the outcome though , most people all seem to
like the Honorable Judge Stephens.

IMO
JMO

 

[Grammy Jean]

I mentioned earlier I was in court all day. An interesting tid bit. After BC was excused and the jury began their review of evidence, there was a lot of whispering between Klink and JY. I so wish I could read lips. I will say JY's expressions while whispering were quite animated. I found it to be very chilly in the courtroom but Klink was sweating and fanning himself a lot. Again very impressed with jury as they diligently viewed evidence for 3 hours and 20 minutes with no lunch or potty break!

 

[Bottle Cap]

I mentioned earlier I was in court all day. An interesting tid bit. After BC was excused and the jury began their review of evidence, there was a lot of whispering between Klink and JY. I so wish I could read lips. I will say JY's expressions while whispering were quite animated. I found it to be very chilly in the courtroom but Klink was sweating and fanning himself a lot. Again very impressed with jury as they diligently viewed evidence for 3 hours and 20 minutes with no lunch or potty break!

That's very heartening to hear, Grammy Jean, ty for the report.

 

[gitana1]

This case, Jason Young?

He was arrested in 2009, served about a year and a half.

Released on bail in July of 2011, still out and attending his 2nd trial.

Thank you!

But Cammy,
People can't sleep when they hear that kind of news. They just can't. The mind and the body won't let them.

Ain't that the truth. I have received the call that one of my loved ones was dead or dying on a few occasions. Could not sleep before I arrived, or rest, or eat, or do anything but have alarm bells ringing and sit in a rigid adrenaline haze. That lasted until afterwards. No sleep later on either. And it's not just me. That's a NORMAL reaction, unless you just killed your wife.

What I find so strange and extremely concerning that our society, and by extension all possible potential jury members for any case in the future, need one single physical piece of evidence to point to guilt. Or they need to see actual pictures and videos of a crime or some aspect of a defendant's activities.

I think the point is that each piece of the puzzle needs to be evaluated in it's totality. And decide if Jason Young is indeed perhaps the most unlucky man alive to have so many unfortunate bad coincidences happen on the very night his wife is violently murdered. Or if each of these coincidences are truly just that, coincidences.

I still think it's very unfortunate to have the Pinellas 12 trend that follow so much CSI and crime shows that potential jurors and even juries themselves need the same kind of drama and evidence that is routinely seen in FICTIONAL television shows.

Circumstantial cases are just as compelling as a case with actual videotape or pictorial depictions of a murder. Nor does it mean that a defendant in a circumstantial case is any less guilty than a who is videotaped shooting a store clerk during a botched robbery.

Its as though common sense in the Courtroom has completely vanished. And the Pinellas 12 are the norm rather than the exception.

Thank you so much for that! I have been seeing this trend too and it troubles me greatly. Someone will analyze one piece of evidence or testimony and if they have an alternate explanation for what that evidence or testimony COULD show, then there is reasonable doubt.

But that's not the way the law works, That's not what reasonable doubt means. Each piece of evidence or testimony is to be examined as part of a whole. Anything barring eyewitness testimony of recordings of an actual crime in progress, can be picked apart of put in doubt. But when analyzed as part of a whole, a series of "coincidences" may no longer be so coincidental and instead, may be the basis for a rock solid circumstantial case, which most cases brought to trial, are.

The question should not be if any one piece of evidence could be explained away, but whether all the evidence, when taken as a whole, can reasonably leave room for doubt. The piecemeal approach is wrong and drives me batty. But since the CSI effect is in full force, without a recording or eyewitness testimony, that's the approach too many jurors take.

It's sad that logic too often does not seem to play a part in the understanding of what "reasonable" means, anymore.

 

[Just the Fax]

Grammy, don't know if you knew the 4 alternates sit on the far left side....2 top, 2 bottom. I noticed a difference in a couple of their attention to detail when I was there.

 

[otto]

Can I agree he was on the Applebee premises without being inside, or does that make me a hostile poster?

:biggrin:

I just listened to the sister's testimony and she doesn't say anything about eating before going to Meredith's place. She says that they were almost at Meredith's house when friends advised Jason to lawyer up before talking to police. They pulled into the restaurant (sounds like they were in the parking area) and she called a lawyer that she knew from an eye injury. Her mom left a message for the lawyer and then they carried on to Meredith's house - the message was a request to recommend a lawyer for Jason. There is absolutely nothing said about stopping for a meal ... so if someone on some other board claimed that they stopped for a meal on the way to Meredith's house, I think that would be the place to ask for a link. There is nothing in testimony about stopping for a meal ... so I think it's safe to say that they didn't go into the restaurant or buy food.

 

[octobermoon]

Thank you Grammy Jean

I am glad to hear the jury took their time to review/view the evidence. Did they linger on anything in particular?

 

[Just the Fax]

I mentioned earlier I was in court all day. An interesting tid bit. After BC was excused and the jury began their review of evidence, there was a lot of whispering between Klink and JY. I so wish I could read lips. I will say JY's expressions while whispering were quite animated. I found it to be very chilly in the courtroom but Klink was sweating and fanning himself a lot. Again very impressed with jury as they diligently viewed evidence for 3 hours and 20 minutes with no lunch or potty break!

:hot:

I have the visual.

:floorlaugh:

 

[borndem]

Go to 28:35 on this video of David Saacks and listen for the next minute or two. He talks about JY's DNA and prints on the molding and wall.

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/9771619/#/vid9771619

Ahhhh.... Can they play Saacks' closing to the jury, too? Pleeeeze???

 

[otto]

If they'd asked for clothing, how could they have ever been certain afterwards that they'd been given what he actually had on? Oh, corroboration from witnesses who were with him? Welp, we have that.

The only way that would have helped with anything is if they could have gone charging into MY's apartment and snatched the clothes off his back and the shoes off his feet.

Investigators still had a responsibility to request all the clothing if they want to argue that clothing is missing.

 

[Grammy Jean]

Grammy, don't know if you knew the 4 alternates sit on the far left side....2 top, 2 bottom. I noticed a difference in a couple of their attention to detail when I was there.

JTF, I did not know who the alternates were so thanks for that!