State vs Jason Lynn Young 2-9-12

[otto]

The footprints at the bathroom door, on the carpet, are side by side. Not as you would expect them to be if someone was walking. She went in the master bedroom, stepped into blood, was picked up, and set down at the bathroom. Sent into the bathroom, had the door shut behind her. If she was then put to bed, there's nothing stopping her from waking up later in the day, late morning early afternoon, and wandering around the upstairs on her own.

There is also nothing no reason to believe the only way her doll could have gotten next to MY was to have been "placed". If CY awoke, climbed out of bed with her doll baby and was found standing in blood, the doll could easily have been dropped in the process of someone picking her up.

Is there any evidence that the child did not walk to the bathroom? The officer stated that there were child's footprints from the bedroom, down the hall and into the bathroom. Other than rumor about no bloody prints in the hallway, which we now know isn't true, what evidence is there that the child was carried?

 

[gritguy]

I learned along time ago whether or not I believe someone to be guilty I cannot convict someone based on my feelings.

Maybe it has been the juries I have served on; I don't know.

What I do know is that LE must follow the evidence. If that evidence supports their theory perfect.

The dots even with forensics must be connected before I will ever state a person to be guilty.

This though is simply me.

I agree with that. It's clear the prosecution and defense agree he's a bad person. They disagree (in court at least who knows privately) about whether he is guilty.

I understand reasonable people take different positions, regardless of their experience in LE or the trial system, on whether the evidence known to date is enough to the guilt of JY.

My opinion, just mine, is not born of my feelings, but rather what I believe happened based on all the evidence presented. Based on that, I do have some pretty strong feelings about JY, negative almost entirely.

 

[Bottle Cap]

I learned along time ago whether or not I believe someone to be guilty I cannot convict someone based on my feelings.

Maybe it has been the juries I have served on; I don't know.

What I do know is that LE must follow the evidence. If that evidence supports their theory perfect.

The dots even with forensics must be connected before I will ever state a person to be guilty.

This though is simply me.

Here's what I don't understand. Some people point to lack of JY DNA or blood at the crime scene, nothing under MY's fingernails. But there's nobody else's either. All that says is that someone is smart enough not to leave their DNA all over the place. I don't see how that eliminates JY.

 

[Madeleine74]

Good to see you, Gritguy!

 

[Cammy]

A female officer has taken the stand.

Karen Battle <sp>, a patrol sgt. for 15 years for Wake County.

She went up to the office area, and collected a few documents.

Then she went to the bonus room , and then came down and set on the couch.

Mostly paper documents she was looking at.

HC is up, btw.

Going through items confiscated with s/w.

Baggage claim ticket

USA airline card stmt, and receipts from a Hampton Inn dated 9/05/06, not sure where.

Receipt from Adams Mark in Denver, Co...

Green expanded file ..??

3 Wedding photos of MY with her ring on. ??

Ring appraisal report.:

Purchase of a wedding band

Travel arrangements of some kind......

All being entered as evidence.

 

[Cammy]

What time did MF go to the house? I was unable to watch her testimony this time and cannot remember.

approx 1:30 pm, 11/03/06

 

[Bottle Cap]

Is there any evidence that the child did not walk to the bathroom? The officer stated that there were child's footprints from the bedroom, down the hall and into the bathroom. Other than rumor about no bloody prints in the hallway, which we now know isn't true, what evidence is there that the child was carried?

All I can say is, look at the photograph for yourself and see what you think. Look at the two little footprints on the carpet right at the edge of the bathroom door. See if they're side by side, which isn't consistent with taking steps. See if you see any footprints behind them.

 

[octobermoon]

He is so droll................................................zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz............

Sorry mods. I have family from the south who have more "spark" !

 

[Allusonz]

Here's what I don't understand. Some people point to lack of JY DNA or blood at the crime scene, nothing under MY's fingernails. But there's nobody else's either. All that says is that someone is smart enough not to leave their DNA all over the place. I don't see how that eliminates JY.

MY appears to have fought back. It was like most murders a very brutle crime. Everyone leaves DNA and there is alot of DNA in this case.

My issue with the DNA is the fact that they cannot identify recurring DNA in that home even after testing over 100 people that had been in the home.

As well you would expect to find JY's DNA in some very specifics spots. Since it cannot be seen and there was no cleanup which is very apparent, an individual cannot selectively remove their DNA.

What I am looking for is the DNA that puts him at the crimescene during this murder and to date the prosecution has not been able to satisfy me on this.

They did not do "blind" DNA testing. Instead the labs were specifically told to only look for JY's DNA. Another huge no no when processing a crime scene. Thus I must then ask myself how many other profiles showed up that is not being presented?

The only way I can think of would be if the defense brings in their own expert to elicit this information.

As well from my research on the case it does not appear to me that they truly looked at any other angle but JY and that disturbs me.

 

[Bottle Cap]

MY appears to have fought back. It was like most murders a very brutle crime. Everyone leaves DNA and there is alot of DNA in this case.

My issue with the DNA is the fact that they cannot identify recurring DNA in that home even after testing over 100 people that had been in the home.

As well you would expect to find JY's DNA in some very specifics spots. Since it cannot be seen and there was no cleanup which is very apparent, an individual cannot selectively remove their DNA.

What I am looking for is the DNA that puts him at the crimescene during this murder and to date the prosecution has not been able to satisfy me on this.

They did not do "blind" DNA testing. Instead the labs were specifically told to only look for JY's DNA. Another huge no no when processing a crime scene. Thus I must then ask myself how many other profiles showed up that is not being presented?

The only way I can think of would be if the defense brings in their own expert to elicit this information.

As well from my research on the case it does not appear to me that they truly looked at any other angle but JY and that disturbs me.

But I thought some other random DNA did turn up.

 

[Cammy]

That's it for today.

I am off to hear Gracie..

:seeya:

 

[Just the Fax]

gritguy.....we enjoyed your expert legal insight for the Brad Cooper trial.
Please hang around. <mod snip>

 

[Allusonz]

But I thought some other random DNA did turn up.

That is what I said. There is unidentified DNA which they cannot attribute to any individual they compared it to.

Example. MY was strangled there should be DNA there. Two boxes from the jewellery box are missing and they cannot determine whose DNA is showing on that box. I can't even buy into the glove theory as there is the unidentified DNA.

 

[Madeleine74]

Michelle didn't fight back so much as try to shield herself. She scratched her own neck during the strangulation part, and her hands were bruised and swollen from shielding herself from the blows on her head.

This is a woman who was likely asleep, and the killer had the element of surprise, not to mention height, weight and strength on his side.

As such, she never stood a chance.

 

[Madeleine74]

by Allusonz: MY was strangled there should be DNA there.

Why must this be so? Do you know if the killer was wearing gloves? Do you know if the killer was using some object to help him get leverage? Not every killing provides DNA of the perp.

 

[Allusonz]

Michelle didn't fight back so much as try to shield herself. She scratched her own neck during the strangulation part, and her hands were bruised and swollen from shielding herself from the blows on her head.

This is a woman who was likely asleep, and the killer had the element of surprise, not to mention height, weight and strength on his side.

As such, she never stood a chance.

I probably used the wrong word here. I should of used defensive wounds. HTH.

We can't have it both ways. Either she is asleep or she is not. There is more to me that points to the fact that she was not asleep. She was not prepared for bed. A treadmill was still on.

To me it appears that at some point she was interrupted/surpised (inject any adjective you wish).

The ME did not perform a rape exam as she was still fully dressed. I think he should still of performed one. That though is simply my opinion.

 

[otto]

That's it for today.

I am off to hear Gracie..

:seeya:

I just heard how 5'11" is just a little bit taller than 5' ... okay, that sounds like "rehabilitation".

 

[Madeleine74]

I don't about others, but I consider 3am - 3:30am a common time when most people are asleep. Insomniacs, notwithstanding of course. Testimony is that the furnace in the Young house was broken and had not yet been fixed. The house was considered very cold, especially upstairs. This is corroborated by Shelley Schaad, who was with MY hours before she was murdered. SS kept her own coat on the entire time because of the chill in the house.

MY was dressed as someone who was trying to stay warm--sweats. Reasonable to me. She was in her bed. I'm going to go far out on a limb here and surmise she was asleep.

 

[fromageball]

Jurors are complaining about hard seats.

Jurors are asking if they can work during the trial

I missed most of this afternoon...you have to be kidding. Did they really ask if they can work during the trial???

 

[otto]

Michelle didn't fight back so much as try to shield herself. She scratched her own neck during the strangulation part, and her hands were bruised and swollen from shielding herself from the blows on her head.

This is a woman who was likely asleep, and the killer had the element of surprise, not to mention height, weight and strength on his side.

As such, she never stood a chance.

She was wearing a hoodie, so there's no real way to conclude that she was asleep. It seems more likely that she was awake if she was wearing a hoodie.