State vs Jason Lynn Young 2-28-12

[BrownRice]

Saving the best for last?

I am hoping they found the guy who was in the accident, Jason came upon.

Man, what a way to go out.

Not really, it has nothing to do with the case.

I'd like to see the defense show how JY could NEVER have committed this crime because .........................

 

[terminatrixator]

Jenna. Not Janet.

Jenna could have been a crime of opportunity an attempted rape, or a serial killer, moving town to town. I just don't think that there is some serial killer targeting pregnant woman with children in the Triangle area that happen to kill woman in their homes and leave their children there.

 

[Cammy]

well, we could very well be on a verdict watch this weekend it seems...

OMG.........I do not do verdict watches well........

 

[ynotdivein]

AHEM.

Things I KNOW are true:

1. WS posters are very smart.

2. Multiple WS posters can look at the same evidence and come to very disparate conclusions about said evidence.

3. Not everyone who is following this case now, followed the first trial.

4. WS posters can and most often do post with great respect for one another and for the families of all those involved in the cases we follow here.

The above facts lead me to the conclusion that every. single. person. who chooses to post on MY's forum. has the ability to do so in a manner that is respectful of the victims' family, AND of the opinions of other posters who may or may not agree with them.

Review TOS and the Rules, and keep it civil, please.

 

[traveler]

Did anyone test the DNA of the cigarette butts found outside the Young residence? (there were cigarette butts, right? or was that just a rumor)

I wondered about that after Kathy Taft's murderer was arrested b/c of cigarette butt DNA.

BBM - The DT tested the cigarettes as they were found AFTER the house was released as a crime scene. They could have been anyone's cig (Movers, Young Family, landscapers, etc.)....the cig butts were only compared to Jason's DNA because the DT only provided the testing agency JY's DNA....so, what we learned was Jason did not smoke those cigs and they were labelled as "Unidentified DNA"....IIR, IMO.
They did not have DNA samples of anyone that may have been at the house after it was released.

 

[otto]

I think it's also worth mentioning, on behalf of reasonable doubt, that the prosecution has attempted to pull the wool over the jury's eyes. Regarding the car accident testimony, rather than put the officer on the stand to testify about the facts of the accident, the prosecution paraded friends with rumors that implied Michelle was not wearing her seatbelt, that the accident was deliberate attempted murder and that the motive for that implied first attempted murder was insurance.

After the officer did testify, the prosecution then attempted to discredit him through another witness by implying that he was friends with the suspect and would lie. Was it too low to accuse the officer face-to-face that he may be falsifying testimony because he knew the suspect?

 

[LOMom]

Excellent post.

Here's the thing. I firmly believe only a sociopath/psychopath (whether there's a difference is another argument) is capable of eraser killings, which is when one spouse kills the other rather than divorcing them. Psychopaths are generally very intelligent too, so its not some guy in a wifebeater hollering STELLA and waving his Bud can around.

Josh Powell. I don't know how intelligent he was, but he wasn't a doofus. He hadn't been arrested, not enough physical evidence. Maybe NO physical evidence. Circumstantial, yes - wet spot in the rug and fans blowing at it, that sort of thing. He obviously did it. We know now he obviously did it. What would the case against him have looked like?

There are patterns, attitudes, ways of being, ways of behaving and ways of viewing other human beings. Brothers from another mother, all cut from very similar cloth. I'd dearly love to come across just one eraser killer who kept it in his pants, just so I could change my world view up a little for kicks. The patterns are there, the similarities all align and can be disussed ad nauseam, but there's no point really because people will say Oh, just because JY is guilty doesn't mean BC is guilty.

So just because these guys are smart doesn't mean they need to go round getting free passes for murder. Just because we, as regular human beings, can't fathom their minds and find it impossible to believe, doesn't mean they haven't done it. Whatever it is. Googled a dump site, thrown some HP's away. They're a different breed.

 

[pjcitizen]

They do have a sign to the right of the door that says this door is UNlocked at 6AM. The PT actually showed a photo of this sign on the large screen. Ill try to find it and post that part of the testimony.
I absolutely believe that they follow the procedure of unlocking the door so customers can use it..that's what it's there for.

Jmo moo moo

Hey I found this is the WRAL evidence archive:
Pic #34
http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/image_gallery/9726260/

 

[fredwomble]

4) The SUV
No evidence in SUV found
Jason returned in that SUV, that nite
Did not attempt to stall from having SUV examined immediately,

That really makes sense.... How did he not know maybe blood was in there....

Multiple garbage bags that he triple or quadruple-bagged the bloody evidence. Guy didn't kill Michelle on some spur of the moment deal; he put sufficient thought into doing it. Although perhaps some would even argue that like Cassidy's disappearing diaper, maybe there just wasn't any evidence other than Michelle's inconvenient corpse. Right?

 

[Cammy]

I thought BC did it, but then I watched the trial and watched a really good pros case-in-chief that landed a smoking gun in my lap, but told me I couldn't look at the bullets because of National Security. That one thing made me think he didn't do it and the whole thing was a stinker. You don't hide behind something like that if you can honestly open it up (or subpoena google) and make it understandable. You just don't do it. Not in a murder case.

Then I thought JY did it, but the defense raised my hackles on reasonable doubt with the fact that there was unidentifiable materials in the house and the "this case is not solved" mantra.

Now, I'm thinking this will be a hung jury and no one will ever know the truth OR it'll be a conviction and in five years, we'll find out there was a serial killer operating in the area from 2005 to 2010 and several of these cases will be linked and I'll feel like an idiot.

Thnank you, John and for everyone else who answered my questions about the Cooper case.

I also think a hung jury......if not an outright NG.

 

[BrownRice]

I hope this is okay to ask.

Is there anyone here who thought Brad Cooper was NG but thinks Jason Young is G?

Or, vice versa?

I was leaning to NG until the internet search showing the map of where NC's body was found (he googled it the day before the murder). I firmly believe JY is guilty as sin.

 

[Cammy]

Not really, it has nothing to do with the case.

I'd like to see the defense show how JY could NEVER have committed this crime because .........................

Yes, it does,
It would show why Jason did those computer searches.

The defense does not have to do anything, they can sit there and stare at the ceiling and not present a single witness if they
a) possibly think their client did it
b)think the state put on a lousy case

After these past 2 days and the vigorous defense they are putting on, neither of the above appears to be true.

jmo, of course.

 

[LOMom]

They already had the police report and the officer did testify to what he viewed in his mind as facts - he said it was a "typical accident for the area" and didn't look further because he had no reason to believe the husband was trying to kill the wife. So, in essence, since the patrol officer didn't really investigate, there is no available evidence available of the actual accident.

However, the whole premise of the trip for coffee, leaving Cassidy behind, waiting until MY had her seat belt off, JY knowing the road very well (only way to and from his mom's house) makes it all very suspicious and the jury is free to insinuate if they want. As far as the relationship between the trooper's partner and JY, the prosecution was right to bring this up - some jurors may find it suspicious - yet another coincidence?!? Again, the jury is free to insinuate.

I think it's also worth mentioning, on behalf of reasonable doubt, that the prosecution has attempted to pull the wool over the jury's eyes. Regarding the car accident testimony, rather than put the officer on the stand to testify about the facts of the accident, the prosecution paraded friends with rumors that implied Michelle was not wearing her seatbelt, that the accident was deliberate attempted murder and that the motive for that implied first attempted murder was insurance.

After the officer did testify, the prosecution then attempted to discredit him through another witness by implying that he was friends with the suspect and would lie. Was it too low to accuse the officer face-to-face that he may be falsifying testimony because he knew the suspect?

 

[Cammy]

I think it's also worth mentioning, on behalf of reasonable doubt, that the prosecution has attempted to pull the wool over the jury's eyes. Regarding the car accident testimony, rather than put the officer on the stand to testify about the facts of the accident, the prosecution paraded friends with rumors that implied Michelle was not wearing her seatbelt, that the accident was deliberate attempted murder and that the motive for that implied first attempted murder was insurance.

After the officer did testify, the prosecution then attempted to discredit him through another witness by implying that he was friends with the suspect and would lie. Was it too low to accuse the officer face-to-face that he may be falsifying testimony because he knew the suspect?

:goodpost: as usual.

I shouldn't expect anything less of you though, you are good, Otto.
I have really learned a lot from you.

 

[Cammy]

Count me in as another BC NG, but JY G.

Don't get me started on BC, I can't wait for a vindication retrial - and Gessner, well... <modsnip x 100>

Totally agree on JY, I am convinced he was at the very least involved. I do think the State has not handled the prosecution well, and though I doubt any other DA's would fare too much better given the evidence and testimony - "too much better" might be enough to get a G verdict. This team? no.

Interesting...Judge here just might get the RA case as well once this one is over.

I agree about Gessner, he was not the most pleasant person I ever ran across.

 

[fredwomble]

They already had the police report and the officer did testify to what he viewed in his mind as facts - he said it was a "typical accident for the area" and didn't look further because he had no reason to believe the husband was trying to kill the wife. So, in essence, since the patrol officer didn't really investigate, there is no available evidence available of the actual accident.

However, the whole premise of the trip for coffee, leaving Cassidy behind, waiting until MY had her seat belt off, JY knowing the road very well (only way to and from Raleigh to his mom's house) makes it all very suspicious and the jury is free to insinuate if they want.

Their life insurance had been boosted to $1 million within weeks of the car incident, and to $4 million weeks before he succeeded. Two occurrences where a pregnant Michelle Young lost her baby. In the final occurrence, she also lost her life. Betcha the Hush Puppies were present in the car attempt also.

 

[SteelerGirl43]

Multiple garbage bags that he triple or quadruple-bagged the bloody evidence. Guy didn't kill Michelle on some spur of the moment deal; he put sufficient thought into doing it. Although perhaps some would even argue that like Cassidy's disappearing diaper, maybe there just wasn't any evidence other than Michelle's inconvenient corpse. Right?

Bags do get rips and tears in them... It could have happened and blood got on something... If I had killed someone u can bet I would make sure nothing was in my car if I used it to transfer anything bloody..

He put so much thought into this, but yet he wore his shoes that he normally liked to wear... Hmmmm!! Not buying it....

 

[Salem]

STOP BICKERING - NOW! I am not going to send pm's to every poster. Alert the snark and move past it. Keep in mind that if you reply, you are also violating the rules and you will not get past go. Don't RESPOND.

Alert it and move on.

Salem

 

[Cammy]

They already had the police report and the officer did testify to what he viewed in his mind as facts - he said it was a "typical accident for the area" and didn't look further because he had no reason to believe the husband was trying to kill the wife. So, in essence, since the patrol officer didn't really investigate, there is no available evidence available of the actual accident.

However, the whole premise of the trip for coffee, leaving Cassidy behind, waiting until MY had her seat belt off, JY knowing the road very well (only way to and from his mom's house) makes it all very suspicious and the jury is free to insinuate if they want. As far as the relationship between the trooper's partner and JY, the prosecution was right to bring this up - some jurors may find it suspicious - yet another coincidence?!? Again, the jury is free to insinuate.

Michelle did not have her seat belt off.

 

[otto]

They already had the police report and the officer did testify to what he viewed in his mind as facts - he said it was a "typical accident for the area" and didn't look further because he had no reason to believe the husband was trying to kill the wife. So, in essence, since the patrol officer didn't really investigate, there is no available evidence available of the actual accident.

However, the whole premise of the trip for coffee, leaving Cassidy behind, waiting until MY had her seat belt off, JY knowing the road very well (only way to and from Raleigh to his mom's house) makes it all very suspicious and the jury is free to insinuate if they want.

Michelle was wearing her seatbelt. That is what was reported at the time of the accident. Anything that friends testified to while wearing their 20/20 hindsight goggles is trumped by the investigating officer that attended the scene.