Verdict Watch

[otto]

The defense should have simply let the 'shirt issue' drop, rather than bringing for a photo of JLY in a completely different shirt they are attempting to 'pass off' as the same shirt IMO.

I think the jury only needs one false implication from Jason to discredit his testimony. The sweaters do not look the same to me.

 

[Melanie]

Please forgive me for coming in so late at this trial, but is the ADA asking for the DP or LWOP or Manslaughter?

Thanks so much.

Mel

 

[iucpa]

Re: the twig talk - isn't it possible the twig was already on the ground? I don't recall him saying he broke a twig off and used it - couldn't it have been that there was a twig already on the ground? It was Fall after all...

 

[gracielee]

It's more difficult to be aware of all the evidence when the trial is conducted in a foreign language over a period of 11 months, but there is an equal abundance of evidence (note: no plea bargain in that justice system). After a few weeks, we heard nothing more than circumstantial evidence in the murder of Michelle Young. Even with the absence of DNA, hair or fibers from Jason on the victim and no injuries to Jason (even though this was a violent, brutal attack), his alibi is dismissed and the assumption is that the jury will arrive at the "correct" conclusion that he is guilty of murder.

To quote Madeleine74 (post #7): "I too am amazed at the gullibility and sheer ignorance of so many who do not understand circumstantial evidence, reasonable inference, don't actually follow a trial and yet claim to know what the proper verdict should be"

I especially thought this comment was relevant in terms of respecting jury opinions. As I mentioned, I really enjoy the insights that Madeleine brings to the discussion (Cooper trial post-verdict):

I'm sorry, I've read through this twice, and I can't seem to understand what you are saying or meaning. How the Kerchner trial compares with the cooper and young trials? So I don't know how or what to comment on or reply to. I'm not ducking this issue, I just don't understand.

 

[Prancy]

this is just my amatuer opinion of body language but the pros team is just sitting back in their chair relaxed, something routine to them.

the def on the other hand, JY is leaned forward with his elbows perhaps on his knee/legg, while one of the def guys is sitting forward in his chair, (seems nervous to me) and the other guy sitting back in his chair and he's close up to the def table.

Hmmmmmm................does this sort of thing usually bode well for the pros? is that why the def side looks a little more rattled? or is that just the MO for the def because they have so much at stake, the freedom of their client?

just wonderin'
fran

IMO it's because most juries follow the state's request to find the defendant guilty in this county. The defense attorneys know it's rare for Wake County juries to not do that. I live here and know this. And no, I'm not a JY defender, but this is true IMO.

 

[gracielee]

Sound back on, judge says they can go a bit later tonight if the jury wants to, within reason, and he's excusing them back to deliberate again

 

[iucpa]

I think the jury only needs one false implication from Jason to discredit his testimony. The sweaters do not look the same to me.

To be technically fair, the defense never stated they were the same. I know it was somewhat implied, but they didn't state "this is the same shirt".

The effect will be the same, and I believe the jury will discredit his testimony (if they were giving it any merit to begin with) and will find him guilty.

 

[gracielee]

IMO it's because most juries follow the state's request to find the defendant guilty in this county. The defense attorneys know it's rare for Wake County juries to not do that. I live here and know this. And no, I'm not a JY defender, but this is true IMO.

I lived in Wake Co. for 35 years, and I disagree. I think perhaps most juries find the defendant guilty because Wake Co. is not known to 'rush to judgement' IMO. That's why it was years before they finally nabbed Anne Miller Konce, years before they arrested Jason Young.

 

[otto]

I'm sorry, I've read through this twice, and I can't seem to understand what you are saying or meaning. How the Kerchner trial compares with the cooper and young trials? So I don't know how or what to comment on or reply to. I'm not ducking this issue, I just don't understand.

I'm simply curious whether general assumptions about the validity of circumstantial evidence, and respecting jury decisions, are always true, or only true in cases where the husband is accused of murdering his wife.

 

[ncsu95]

Please forgive me for coming in so late at this trial, but is the ADA asking for the DP or LWOP or Manslaughter?

Thanks so much.

Mel

No DP. Mandatory sentence of LWOP for this crime.

 

[fran]

I saw and heard the judge release the jury back to the deliberation room, but when he was talking to the lawyers, there was a military plane or helicopter going overhead and couldn't hear a darn thing! :maddening:

sorry,
fran

 

[otto]

To be technically fair, the defense never stated they were the same. I know it was somewhat implied, but they didn't state "this is the same shirt".

The effect will be the same, and I believe the jury will discredit his testimony (if they were giving it any merit to begin with) and will find him guilty.

I think it was one of those things that the defense tried to sneak past everyone. The implication and hope is that the jury will conclude that the shirt that Jason wore on the night of the murder was always available, but that police used tunnel vision to zero in on Jason and fabricated the statement that his clothes from the night of the murder were missing. If the jury comes back with a not guilty verdict, I think we can assume they believe that it is the same shirt. In any case, it sounds like there is some healthy debate in the jury room.

 

[Skittles]

JS also told jury not to rush just because it's already almost 4:00. After the jury left the room he said he'd let them go as late as 6:30, unless they requested to go a little later.

 

[iucpa]

I think it was one of those things that the defense tried to sneak past everyone. The implication and hope is that the jury will conclude that the shirt that Jason wore on the night of the murder was always available, but that police used tunnel vision to zero in on Jason and fabricated the statement that his clothes from the night of the murder were missing. If the jury comes back with a not guilty verdict, I think we can assume they believe that it is the same shirt. In any case, it sounds like there is some healthy debate in the jury room.

Healthy debate is good, regardless of verdict. I don't think a NG verdict automatically assumes they matched the shirts. It's possible (if not probable) to conclude they are different shirts but that there still isn't sufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the murders. The lack of physical evidence REALLY concerns me...

 

[happy2binNC]

Re: the twig talk - isn't it possible the twig was already on the ground? I don't recall him saying he broke a twig off and used it - couldn't it have been that there was a twig already on the ground? It was Fall after all...

I don't believe he said either way, whether he found something on the ground or reached to the bush to break off a branch. The state specifically pointed out that he couldn't reach the bush, and since JLY didn't mention finding a stick on the ground, THAT is what the jury will remember, IMO.

 

[otto]

Healthy debate is good, regardless of verdict. I don't think a NG verdict automatically assumes they matched the shirts. It's possible (if not probable) to conclude they are different shirts but that there still isn't sufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed the murders. The lack of physical evidence REALLY concerns me...

I guess that is the big question: is the circumstantial evidence compelling enough for the jury to conclude Jason acted alone, Jason acted with an accomplice; or is the defense argument that Jason was a couple of hundred miles away without enough gas more compellling?

 

[gracielee]

I'm simply curious whether general assumptions about the validity of circumstantial evidence, and respecting jury decisions, are always true, or only true in cases where the husband is accused of murdering his wife.

Almost all cases are decided on circumstantial evidence. Seldom are there video camera's that capture crimes. What was the name of that Florida girl, caught on the car wash video, being led off by her rapist/murderer? That's a rarity when it comes to rape and/or murder. IMO, the Timothy Hennis case is a perfect example of a circumstantial case, the jury was right, yet crafty defense lawyers got him off on appeal. Later to find, after DNA was perfected to be useful, that the circumstantial jury was right after all. Most of the time, circumstantial evidence tells a story. You follow the story and receive your answer. IMO I was one of the few, the very few, who continually argued against the Ramsey's as being guilty of the murder of JonBenet. I took years of heat for that, but never believed they were involved at all.

 

[gracielee]

I saw and heard the judge release the jury back to the deliberation room, but when he was talking to the lawyers, there was a military plane or helicopter going overhead and couldn't hear a darn thing! :maddening:

sorry,
fran

He was telling the lawyers that 'he was going to let the jury deliberate until about 6:30 or so, if they wanted to............'

 

[CrimeAddict]

Hi all, I am stalking this thread and waiting with all of you. The Anthony trial has me sucked in today!

Wanted to say hello!

 

[cody100]

Off subject, but I have never seen so many sidebars as in the ICA trial. No wonder this trial is taking so long.