State vs Jason Lynn Young: weekend discussion 11-18 Feb 2012

[otto]

I don't think it's possible to get much information from this image ... would like to see the true original

 

[gracielee]

What woman could this possibly be?

MY had no enemies (Ms Money had an alibi).

Just some random thoughts that came to me with all this discussion about 'women hair pullers' and such. IMO, this sounds a bit like female wrestlers or mud-fighters. Events 'put on' for the *entertainment* :waitasec: of males. Certainly not a reflection of *real life* experiences or what truly happens in violent events in society. Especially those between family members or significant others IMO.

 

[Turnadot]

This female would also be leaving size 12 or 10 prints as well!

Easily done. Stuff them with socks to make them fit.

 

[Turnadot]

What woman could this possibly be?

MY had no enemies (Ms Money had an alibi).

IDK, but it doesn't matter, the defense only has to plant the idea that it could have been a woman. JY slept around. A lot.

IMO

To be clear, I believe JY is the killer, I'm just pondering what the defense might do and what the jury may swallow.

 

[janesdean]

There are enough distinguishing features on the two dolls that were used that there should be no doubt that they are both female dolls - a two year old child may have difficultes distinguishing because of cognitive development, but not a 6 year old.

The doll looks definitely manly. It doesn't matter anyway, CY picked out two dolls. one that looks like her mom and she called the mommy doll, the other one looks like a man, possibly her dad and she does not identify it at all. The important thing here is, as Judge Stephens ruled, her re-enactment shows she witnessed her mothers murder, and shows what she saw. If her mother had been beaten to death by a stranger, CY would have (by now) made some sort of statement to that effect. She has not. Instead, she HAS talked about her dad on the 911 call, to Meredith in the fire truck after she was found and has NEVER mentioned a stranger, scary man, boogey man, only her father. It is what it is !

 

[PoppyMcTwist]

It would have to be a goth (with very big feet), because there's no indication from anybody that any woman was going to personally gain from MY's murder, or that any woman had any reason to be enraged at her. And this woman would have had to be responsible for the only clump of hair dislodged during a brutal beating with a weapon, and leave no hair of her own behind.

Did the defense team cross to the point the hair was pulled out? It'd be interesting to know the exchange on that.

If not a goth, then maybe a hobbit?

I don't think a woman killed Michelle, but I must admit that certain aspects of this crime remind me of the Candy Morrison case.....where a calm conversation between suburban housewives escalated into a vicious axe murder. One of the women was the mistress of the other woman's husband, of course.

 

[gritguy]

Easily done. Stuff them with socks to make them fit.

Granted.

I will say that if I did not believe JY killed MY, then I would be open to these ideas (which don't have evidence behind them) of a female killer. But still, it's a female killer under this idea who happened to stuff her well-socked feet into size 12 HP's the same type and size JY wore. That would be a world-class coincidence.

 

[janesdean]

Hair pulling is usually done by women in fights.

Are you suggesting she was fighting herself ?

 

[gritguy]

If not a goth, then maybe a hobbit?

I don't think a woman killed Michelle, but I must admit that certain aspects of this crime remind me of the Candy Morrison case.....where a calm conversation between suburban housewives escalated into a vicious axe murder. One of the women was the mistress of the other woman's husband, of course.

Completely agree women can kill, and kill with weapons.. I just think the one clump of hair doesn't indicate a woman, man, weapon, or anything more than the other given the nature of the attack. Nor does the clump of hair in any way add to the idea JY did it, either, of course.

 

[Just the Fax]

It would have to be a goth (with very big feet), because there's no indication from anybody that any woman was going to personally gain from MY's murder, or that any woman had any reason to be enraged at her. And this woman would have had to be responsible for the only clump of hair dislodged during a brutal beating with a weapon, and leave no hair of her own behind.

Did the defense team cross to the point the hair was pulled out? It'd be interesting to know the exchange on that.

Jennifer Remy, a hair and fiber analyst with the State Bureau of Investigation Crime Lab.

Hair clump and the one in the hand was "forceably removed".

Cross starts 35:09...klink never made a point that the assailant could be female....he did said it took force to pull the hair out and Remy agreed

http://www.wral.com/specialreports/michelleyoung/video/10735509/#/vid10735509

 

[Grammy Jean]

IDK, but it doesn't matter, the defense only has to plant the idea that it could have been a woman. JY slept around. A lot.

IMO

To be clear, I believe JY is the killer, I'm just pondering what the defense might do and what the jury may swallow.

I believe the DT has already tried to cast suspicion on MF which as I said before( and I know it is their job) but I find that truly despicable. In DT cross of MF they tried to make it sound like she was being untruthful on the 911 call. Again despicable!!!

 

[Just the Fax]

Sorry, wife wanted to do some grocery shopping. Reading through thread now and will see if anything can be done with hall photo.

Thanks...just wanted to see if you could improve what I came up with here

 

[Turnadot]

Granted.

I will say that if I did not believe JY killed MY, then I would be open to these ideas (which don't have evidence behind them) of a female killer. But still, it's a female killer under this idea who happened to stuff her well-socked feet into size 12 HP's the same type and size JY wore. That would be a world-class coincidence.

Not really if an angry spurned lover decided to frame JY.

If a jury must consider that JY wore shoes too small to throw off the cops, then from a defense POV, the jury must consider someone wore shoes in JY's size and brand to throw off the cops.

Again, I think he did it, but the Anthony trial was a huge wake-up call to me, wrt what defense teams will try.

 

[Madeleine74]

Couldn't be someone who used JY's actual shoes. JY claimed those shoes were no longer in his possession and had been donated to charity. Of course those shoes were actually on JY's feet that night.

 

[Turnadot]

I believe the DT has already tried to cast suspicion on MF which as I said before( and I know it is their job) but I find that truly despicable. In DT cross of MF they tried to make it sound like she was being untruthful on the 911 call. Again despicable!!!

God that's revolting!

 

[Just the Fax]

I believe the DT has already tried to cast suspicion on MF which as I said before( and I know it is their job) but I find that truly despicable. In DT cross of MF they tried to make it sound like she was being untruthful on the 911 call. Again despicable!!!

I agree, despicable.
Shows how desperate they are.
Someone close to CY cleaned her, so they have no choice but to point the finger at MF.
It should be so obvious to the jury that person caring for CY was JLY - if they have a lick of sense.

 

[Turnadot]

Couldn't be someone who used JY's actual shoes. JY claimed those shoes were no longer in his possession and had been donated to charity. Of course those shoes were actually on JY's feet that night.

I agree they were on his feet that night. I think he bagged and tossed them after he beat his pregnant and helpless wife to death.

IMO

 

[otto]

The doll looks definitely manly. It doesn't matter anyway, CY picked out two dolls. one that looks like her mom and she called the mommy doll, the other one looks like a man, possibly her dad and she does not identify it at all. The important thing here is, as Judge Stephens ruled, her re-enactment shows she witnessed her mothers murder, and shows what she saw. If her mother had been beaten to death by a stranger, CY would have (by now) made some sort of statement to that effect. She has not. Instead, she HAS talked about her dad on the 911 call, to Meredith in the fire truck after she was found and has NEVER mentioned a stranger, scary man, boogey man, only her father. It is what it is !

The figure in the red shirt is a child with a school bag over the shoulder in the hispanic set. The figure in purple is the grandmother in the caucasian set. That explains why there is a difference in size/height between the grandmother figure and the figure in red ... one is a child. The third figure, if it is the same set, is wearing green medical colors.

From what I can find online, Marvel toys developed these Educational Toys (that was the search term that I used to identify the toy company) for toddlers in about 1994-5. I assumed they were educational toys for toddlers because there are no moving parts. I guess the company decided that a traditional looking grandmother was more educational than a post-plastic surgery, liposuctioned, hair dyed woman in jeans labeled "grandma". For some reason, in the development of educational toys for toddlers, that was the design that Marvel approved.

The two dolls/figures she selected are a child and a grandmother ... but at daycare, the child figure represented her mom and perhaps the grandmother represented her father. I posted info yesterday documenting that 2 year old children don't fare well in gender recognition of representations of male and female ... but by age 6, most children can identify gender and all adults successfully identified gender. The grandma figure should be recognizable as a female to all adults ... according to gender recognition research.

 

[Turnadot]

The figure in the red shirt is a child with a school bag over the shoulder in the hispanic set. The figure in purple is the grandmother in the caucasian set. That explains why there is a difference in size/height between the grandmother figure and the figure in red ... one is a child. The third figure, if it is the same set, is wearing green medical colors.

From what I can find online, Marvel toys developed these Educational Toys (that was the search term that I used to identify the toy company) for toddlers in about 1994-5. I assumed they were educational toys for toddlers because there are no moving parts. I guess the company decided that a traditional looking grandmother was more educational than a post-plastic surgery, liposuctioned, hair dyed woman in jeans labeled "grandma". For some reason, in the development of educational toys for toddlers, that was the design that Marvel approved.

The two dolls/figures she selected are a child and a grandmother ... but at daycare, the child figure represented her mom and perhaps the grandmother represented her father. I posted info yesterday documenting that 2 year old children don't fare well in gender recognition of representations of male and female ... but by age 6, most children can identify gender and all adults successfully identified gender. The grandma figure should be recognizable as a female to all adults ... according to gender recognition research.

BBM, the poor baby probably just snatched up two dolls at random out of the set. I think what is more significant is that apparently the "killer" doll she selected is taller than the mommy doll and could easily pass as a male doll. A child her age can't be expected to know the clothed grandma doll was female - heck, even I had trouble with it and I'm an adult.

IMO

 

[otto]

BBM, the poor baby probably just snatched up two dolls at random out of the set. I think what is more significant is that apparently the "killer" doll she selected is taller than the mommy doll and could easily pass as a male doll. A child her age can't be expected to know the clothed grandma doll was female - heck, even I had trouble with it and I'm an adult.

IMO

There were 10 figures in the box, but only three of them had features that reflected real people. They were the child from the hispanic set, the grandmother from the caucasian set, and the doctor, presumably from the professional set.

Gender recognition in adults includes making associations with all the available information, whereas in children, only some information is associated with gender. An interesting exercise in understanding how children interpret their world is to ask them to draw a face. It is only when children are between 6 and 10 that they include details like ears. There should be enough information in the grandma figure for adults to look at it and instantly recognize it as a grandma ... which explains why the discussion started with how to interpret grandma as a man.

I just looked at the figure sets again ... the doctor is male, the nurse is female, most of the professionals are male ... it looks like stereotypes from the 1960s were used to develop the educational toys.