State vs Jason Young 2-17-2012

[octobermoon]

Computer expert. Missed his name.

 

[Wolfpack]

Next witness will be 30mins. Then Jury released. Then I hope....the hearing....IMO

My thought, and this is just my opinion, is that the judge will make an individual ruling on the statements DURING testimony. i.e. prosecution and witness are instructed to alert the judge before eliciting the statement. Then jury is sent out, decision is made, and it comes in or can't come in. I think this case by case basis may work better than a blanket admittance or ban on testimony. I think if it's case by case, it benefits the prosecution, because as a whole, I don't envision how all of her statements to her teacher can come in.

 

[Grammy Jean]

This could be an exciting afternoon if we hear from the day care worker after the jury leaves. Anyone have ideas if this will be covered on wral?

 

[fran]

I believe that's why the judge wants to see the testimony of the daycare provider before the jury hears the evidence.

From what I recall, the pros said the same worker who provided the dolls left and just saw a few statements or a portion of what the child said. So I guess that will mean two daycare workers will have to come before the judge so he can confirm the relevance or admissibility.

Course, I could be wrong,
JMHO
fran

 

[~n/t~]

Computer expert. Missed his name.

Michael Smith

 

[gritguy]

IIRCC, the judge said something about her not saying the identity of the perp, but something about the reason 'why the perp left an eye witness.' I think he meant it was up to the jury to determine THEIR opinion on why whoever did this, would leave the child because she MAY have been a witness.

I believe this again goes under the 'circumstantial evidence' rules.

Is that right, gritguy?
fran

I missed all that part, but that sounds right. It sounds like he will allow enough to support the possibility that CY actually witnessed the attack, but that he may disallow statements of identity. In that case, as you say, the jury can consider why this witness was not harmed during the attack.

Clearly one good reason is that it was JY and he didn't want to kill his daughter, just the wife. But, I remember another nasty case where a guy stabbed a woman to death in her home - stranger killing the best they could tell, a long time ago - and left a very young child (not baby) without harm despite the child having seen the attack. So that does happen too. However, if the fact-finder here sees the evidence trail to be that CY was moved around, cleaned up, and otherwise treated gingerly despite having been a direct witness to the murder, they might consider why that is.

Given the way I see things, I think it was b/c it was JY who did it.

 

[octobermoon]

Discussing emails from JY's computer, but not what the emails say.

 

[cityslick]

I missed all that part, but that sounds right. It sounds like he will allow enough to support the possibility that CY actually witnessed the attack, but that he may disallow statements of identity. In that case, as you say, the jury can consider why this witness was not harmed during the attack.

Clearly one good reason is that it was JY and he didn't want to kill his daughter, just the wife. But, I remember another nasty case where a guy stabbed a woman to death in her home - stranger killing the best they could tell, a long time ago - and left a very young child (not baby) without harm despite the child having seen the attack. So that does happen too. However, if the fact-finder here sees the evidence trail to be that CY was moved around, cleaned up, and otherwise treated gingerly despite having been a direct witness to the murder, they might consider why that is.

Given the way I see things, I think it was b/c it was JY who did it.

I don't think a stranger leaving her alive is that unusual, if you take that information by itself. It would be the other parts (the cleaning up, moving around, etc) that the state would need to emphasize along with the testimony of the teacher to ask 'who would do that other than JY'.

 

[octobermoon]

Reading the email to GC.

 

[gritguy]

Man that e-mail is so full of BS you could shred it, put it in your flower bed, and raise some prize-winning flowers!

 

[Madeleine74]

It contains some of that product Scott Peterson was selling. (SP was a manure salesman).

 

[Grammy Jean]

I am just thinking about the voice mail call JY left for MF 11:30 Thursday morning. Remember he had not called her since her CY nanny days. After hearing GC's testimony yesterday recounting the rage of JY and then his later downplaying the whole event, has made me think of this call JY made. He wanted MF to know he had not thrown the remote and MY said was just dramatizing things. I think it was right after that he began his murder plan. I used to think he planned this weeks before but now think it was that day. It's 11:30 in the morning and he knows AF will not be visiting and he sees the opportunity with his out of town alibi. Just my thoughts wandering and speculating.

 

[MoonFlwr]

Man that e-mail is so full of BS you could shred it, put it in your flower bed, and raise some prize-winning flowers!

LOL

The way he is reading it makes it sounds far less out there, than the way Michelle's friend yelled it out!

 

[gritguy]

It contains some of that product Scott Peterson was selling. (SP was a manure salesman).

JY was "profoundly changed" by the vehicle accidents? :floor laugh:

The only thing clearly honest in this e-mail is that he obviously doesn't love his wife. Memories of "GC" allow him to "get by" and all those sleepless nights of would-have, could-have's.

 

[NCEast]

LOL

The way he is reading it makes it sounds far less out there, than the way Michelle's friend yelled it out!

I swear, I hate to be so critical because I'm so darn far from perfect--but the agent read that email as though he was in the 5th grade.
And I missed hearing he or BH giving the DATE of that email.....did they even say the date??

 

[gritguy]

JY says he really really love GC; apparently he was passionate about her. Maybe that's why she got to see the violent side, b/c he was emotional about her. MY not so much. A pain the butt, pissed him off, someone you have to tolerate and argue with, but he really didn't care about her much, not enough to get him worked up to max like GC. At least not til he decided to remove the obstacle in his life.

 

[gracielee]

Next witness will be 30mins. Then Jury released. Then I hope....the hearing....IMO

Yes, I hurried to walk my dogs before this witness. Did I miss much??

 

[MoonFlwr]

I swear, I hate to be so critical because I'm so darn far from perfect--but the agent read that email as though he was in the 5th grade.
And I missed hearing he or BH giving the DATE of that email.....did they even say the date??

They gave the date...I don't recall the exact date - but it was early October 2006 as far as I recall!

 

[octobermoon]

Yes, I hurried to walk my dogs before this witness. Did I miss much??

Not much. He gave his credentials, and now is reading emails on JY's computer.

 

[CarolinaMoon]

Quite the nastygram in e-mails to the wife. They also showed his issues with being in control. Everything was what HE wanted and he complained a lot about anything she may have preferred.