« Trotting out the “Constitutionally Incapable” Defense | Main | A Late Indian Summer »
November 18, 2006
I Love You to Death - Reprise
Sam and Marilyn Sheppard
Jeffrey and Colette MacDonald
Eric and Pegye Bechler
Michael and Jennifer Blagg
Michael and Kathleen Peterson
Bruce and Jana Koklich
Greg and Kristin deVillers
Scott and Laci Peterson
Mark and Lori Hacking
What do these couples have in common?
- Proclaimed by friends and family to be doting lovebirds.
- Affluent, professional, well educated and living in nice neighborhoods.
- Statistically very low chances for victimization by strange assailants.
- The victims were found dead under suspicious circumstances, murdered, or vanished without a trace.
- Most of the victims were pregnant at the time of their murder.
- The accused or suspected spouse was guilty of major deception, chronic infidelity or was carrying on an extramarital relationship at the time of their spouse’s “disappearance” or murder.
- All of the accused staged dramatic scenarios (staged domestic homicides, per FBI parlance) to deflect suspicion.
- None of the couples had a history of abuse or domestic violence. The Bechlers and the Koklichs ran businesses together. Most were first marriages where the couple met in college.
- In most cases, there were severe financial problems that were not disclosed until after an investigation of the crimes, and large life insurance policies on the missing or murdered spouse.
- What were previously close family relationships among in-laws and siblings were irreparably divided by the incidents. The family of the victim tirelessly pursued justice and actively assisted the prosecution.
The Scorecard:
Sheppard – conviction was overturned, accused passed away rather young.
MacDonald – convicted of multiple murders; was eligible for a parole hearing in 1991, still working on an appeal based on DNA evidence, but don’t expect to see him strolling on the beach anytime soon.
Bechler – convicted (without the body of his wife ever being found) - currently serving a life sentence.
Blagg - convicted of murdering his wife, but has not been charged or tried for his daughter's murder.
Michael Peterson – convicted and sentenced to life without parole.
Bruce Koklich – convicted of second degree murder (with no body found), sentenced to 15 years to life.
Kristin Rossum – sentenced to life.
Scott Peterson - convicted of double murder and condemned to death.
Mark Hacking - pled guilty and is serving an inexact amount of time.
Oh yeah, they loved them to death!
Comments
Please incude Janet Abaora in you list. Google and then read up on her story and prepare to be horrified. Her 'man' remains free. As with all listed here, and many more that never made headlines, it's an injustice.
Posted by: Remember Janet | November 18, 2006 12:23 PM
Michael and Leann Fletcher is another one that fits most of the catagories in the entry. I believe he is serving LWOP.
Pregnant wife, educated husband, loving inlaws, lived in nice area, afair, one child and pregnant with second, etc.
He shot her as opposed to blunt force trauma and he did make sure his first child wasn't home during his crime.
http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/family/fletcher/1.html
Posted by: Monica` | November 18, 2006 12:28 PM
Carol Neulander was beaten to death. *Hit* ordered by her Rabbi husband.
http://www.southjerseynews.com/neulander/
Posted by: Monica` | November 18, 2006 12:49 PM
Great point from LJ in an email I just received:
Maintaining my armchair MisFitter stance I have to find out something that seems to be eluding me by me missing it or it not being talked about.
Where did the fax/print/whatever generate from. Is he saying he did this at his business meeting? Went shopping instead of a ciggie break/bathroom break/drink of water?
He didn't do it the night before assuming he'd taken a lap top. He talked to his wife at home at 11pm.
Had to be done after 8am assuming his wife was supposed to be at work? Doctors appt? Whatever.
Didn't do in at the relatives, he wasn't there yet.
HE SHOPPED AND BOUGHT A LEATHER HANDBAG WHILE AT WORK (not even his office someone else's office) AND FAXED/PRINTED/WHATEVER TO HIS HOUSE? Then called his sister-in-law to get it? What hogwash!
Sorry this SCREAMS he shouldn't pass go and collect his $200.00 -----------> GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL.
Posted by: loretta | November 18, 2006 03:32 PM
Very interesting observation LJ!
Welcome aboard, don't be shy.
Looks like Jason was trying to fine tune things the morning after.
Posted by: Lesa | November 18, 2006 04:17 PM
Excellent point Loretta...
It is the one thing that has struck me as most odd this whole fax/computer printout. You bring up something I know I had not thought of... when did he send the fax?
Posted by: Concerned Citizen | November 18, 2006 05:10 PM
Well, if he physically shopped for the gift the fax/computer printout would have been unnecessary as he would have had a physical receipt issued at the point-of-purchase.
If he shopped for it online, the estore would have emailed a receipt to his electronic mailbox and not sent a fax. Did Michelle have access to his email account? Doubtful. I suppose he could have been thumbing through a catalogue and order the gift over the phone and then requested a receipt of his payment via credit card via fax. The fax probably had a time stamp at the top of it. Very interesting points.
The whole thing stinks of a spousal murder to high Heaven.
Posted by: Monica` | November 18, 2006 05:23 PM
Rumor on WS that JY no longer has a job at Chartone.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 18, 2006 07:51 PM
He no longer has a job since when? Before or after the murder?
Posted by: Barbara | November 18, 2006 08:48 PM
What Barbara asked!
I don't think companies are allowed to fire people who's wife was just murdered by some unknown. That would be bad policy, if you ask me.
I'm not believing that one, yet.
Posted by: Monica` | November 18, 2006 09:58 PM
FWIW, ChartOne issued a statement that was linked on the last entry.
Posted by: Thumper | November 18, 2006 11:36 PM
I wonder when or if the info on the fax/printout will be released.
Posted by: vero | November 19, 2006 01:42 AM
Went to look for JY's Job rumor. Seems tis was posted in response to some other speculation. ChartOne will know. Everyone is speculating over everything until a timeline comes out but the fax story is key to discovery (no pun intended).
Posted by: JustPassing | November 19, 2006 08:09 AM
Perhaps the fax was missing or nonexistent, in which case the police would immediately conclude that the fax fetch was a ruse and the hubby was the perp, and thus the killing was not random. Maybe Jason is dumber than we think.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 19, 2006 10:53 AM
Arial view of house, woods and trailers
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=5108+...81,0.004715&t=h
The Young house is one in the middle. The neighborhood behind is not a "trailer park" per se, but individual lots with a mix of mobile homes and smaller "stick built". Remember, this area is really quite rural and subdivisions have sprung up around this setting over the years.
Posted by: RPD | November 19, 2006 11:28 AM
Posted by: RPD | November 19, 2006 11:31 AM
Good morning all.
I believe the reason SIL gave for the fax was that he wanted her opinion on which purse to buy.
Why, why, why not send a fax to the SIL's home in that case? It all stinks to high heaven!
May I add; I can't stand the look of that man.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 04:55 AM
Actually, I agree with those who say there was not reason for a fax at all.
If the fax does exist, I'll be surprised. He needed an excuse to get her to the house to attend to his daughter.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 06:36 AM
Good morning, Mgt. I hope you had a lovely weekend.
I agree with you about the fax/printout being unnecessay. If the link Captain Joe provided the other day to her sister's myspace page is accurate (belongs to her), then we can conclude that her sister had a computer. Anything he wanted his SIL to look at could have been sent to her that way.
We all might be making too big a deal about the fax/printout, but I don't think so.
However, that bit of the puzzle wouldn't be enough evidence to arrest Jason.
I'd love to know more.
Posted by: Monica` | November 20, 2006 07:41 AM
We understand from Jason's friend he was looking to buy a "Coach" handbag. Faxing this info makes no sense at all....this link is all you need (living color).
http://www.coach.com/content/CollectionListAll.aspx?categoryId=68
The ONLY other explaination is that it was something he printed from the site earlier and it was laying on his desk or in the printer and he was worried Michelle would see it when she came home (not really a fax, but printout ?
Posted by: RPD | November 20, 2006 08:03 AM
Good point, RPD. If that's the case, then LE would be able to determine the time that "Coach" handbags were searched and printed out at Jason's house through computer forensics. If it was anywhere near the time of her death (wee morning hours), he's in trouble. But like I said earlier, that little tidbit isn't enough to arrest him.
Posted by: Monica` | November 20, 2006 08:18 AM
How can verifying a timeline take this long? For Pete's Sake. He couldn't have driven all night. So where did he stop and when?
Unless LE don't want him to know that he is a suspect, there is no reason to keep this stuff under wraps. I think.
Morning, Monica. This cas really smacks of Lori and Laci, to me. Maybe it doesn't pay to be a strong woman.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 08:33 AM
Um, that should be, case.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 08:34 AM
Just playing Devil's Advocate:
Have we seen anywhere ligit that is the fax was actually about a purse? I think we've only heard that from anonymous commenters. I agree it would be an unbelieveable explanation.
I know several 'traveling salesmen' and it wouldn't be unusual to receive a fax about an order or pricing, etc..something for his work. He might have needed that info to make a call on Friday and called his SIL since she didn't have to work that day. She doesn't seem to have a regular professional job. Didn't her myspace reveal she didn't graduate from college?
To be honest, if my husband called my cell on the day I had a doctors appt and couldn't find me before noon, I don't think he would bat an eyelash about it. He'd also call the in-laws to stop by and read him the info if it was something he needed for work.
I just think the part about the purse and not wanting michelle to see it: that's all speculation that's gotten turned into fact. Someone post a media link if they believe otherwise.
Also my thoughts on the crime scene - not unlikely that she got hit once while asleep then fell out of bed or tried to crawl for the phone maybe? Then bled to death face down. There were no marks on her face, FWIW.
Posted by: fourier | November 20, 2006 08:38 AM
Fourier, if Jason is responsible for this, there would have been more than one blow.
He would have to make sure she was dead, or she would 'finger him', as in point the finger at him.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 08:53 AM
Good point about the gossip mill and the designer purse. Maybe it was something business related (fax/printout). I just can't see him calling his SIL to fetch it for him. Surely he would have waited for Michelle to answer the phone or leave a message for her to call him with the info had that been the case.
How do you know there were no marks on her face, fourier? From media reports/gossip? The same place we are all getting our information about the designer bag?
Posted by: Monica` | November 20, 2006 09:02 AM
We need some real information about this. I think that LE is getting more and more leery about releasing any sort of info. Still, inquiring minds want to know.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 09:10 AM
Monica -
I don't think you can say 'surely he would have waited for Michelle to answer.."
Just an example: If you need quote/price information to place an order before 3 on Friday, then you're stuck because you're wife is in a doctors office with her phone off. So you call your SIL who was your nanny and has done odd jobs for years..
Just an angle to consider and MO!
No marks on her face:I know bc it was an open casket. But I understand if you don't want to take my word for it, I'm just an anonymous poster too after all!
Mgt: If Jason had done it, sure it is likely there was more than one blow, but if it wasn't then maybe not. We have no autopsy report yet..
Posted by: fourier | November 20, 2006 09:10 AM
correction- I meant to type: your SIL who was your nanny and has done odd jobs *for you and your wife* for years, has a key to the house, isn't at work, etc...
Posted by: fourier | November 20, 2006 09:12 AM
I'm not doubting what you say, fourier. I actually like it when someone plays devils advocate. It can be a real mind stretcher for me. So thanks.
The SIL said it was a "fluke" for her to go to the house. I'll take her at her word. Bruising and marks on the face could easily be rectified by a good mortician. The only deceased people I have ever seen in an open casket funeral had makeup caked on their faces.
I apologize to you if you think my post are snarky. I'm really not trying to be. I enjoy the back and forth process/discussion.
Posted by: Monica` | November 20, 2006 09:19 AM
Not at all snarky! I'm just discussing too - trying to keep the forum open to considering all possibilities.
SIL did say it was a fluke, but when I heard that I interpreted she meant: I'm not even supposed to be here, I'm just doing Jason a favor.. what if I didn't come? Nobody would have discovered this until Saturday!
I mean, if I walked into a bank during a holdup, it would have been 'on a fluke.' That doesn't mean I haven't been to the bank before. Also, just something said in the heat of the moment, panic. She did have a key, and went to the house often, I know that.
Yes you make a good point, bruising can be covered with makeup, but not open wounds.
Maybe since the house was released as a crime scene late last week that means we'll hear something soon.. You guys who are more experienced, does that usually mean anything?
Posted by: fourier | November 20, 2006 09:27 AM
Loretta, do you intend to delete this crap from Usenet? I can start a new thread for you if necessary. How would you like to have your name, insurance license number, etc., etc., etc., posted there for posterity?
Dear Carolyn: I don't care what you do on Usenet. Nobody cares. I deleted all the stuff I wrote that I could find. I am not going to spend any more time on this. Have a nice day.
Posted by: Ntegrity | November 20, 2006 10:02 AM
I don't understand the prevalence of open casket funerals. My daughter's mother-in-law hanged herself, and was cut down and kept on life support for days. When the decision was made to turn off the machine and let her go, she had an open-casket funeral. I couldn't go up and pay my respects. I could see others doing so, just to see what the mortician had managed to do with her.
I decided that I would rather remember her animated face when she looked at her grandson, and not whatever artifice the funeral makeup artist had achieved.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 10:20 AM
Fourier, we may still not hear anything much. It depends on the local LE, and what they want released. We know Jason's lawyer will want nothing leaked, but maybe if local people demand some answers; i.e., why LE thinks it's not a random killing. From a standpoint of public safety, they may be forced to reveal a few tidbits.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 10:24 AM
I agree, Vero. I couldn't imagine anything worse than looking at a loved one's dead face.
Sounds callous, I know.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 10:26 AM
I did see my son-in-law. He had a huge bruise on his forehead, yet the autopsy report said there were no marks. I guess it must have appeared later. He drowned while swimming alone in an apartment pool.
I have always been able to cope with it before, even with my mom, but the thought of what C's MIL must have looked like kept me away.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 10:40 AM
I'm with you on the open casket thing, Vero. I much prefer to attend memorial services. I believe them to be much more uplifting than standard funerals.
Although I will say that seeing my father layed out in a casket when I was 5 y/o might be the only reason I could grasp that he was actually dead. Otherwise I might have fantasized about him still being alive and would that he might eventually come back to me.
I think all the caked on makeup is creepy, though.
Posted by: S Car Go | November 20, 2006 10:41 AM
We have very creepy customs. We just don't realize it because we don't compare them with anyone else's.
The whole idea of "funeral homes" is weird, to me. My parents were born in the early 1900's, and, in their day, the custom was still that the relatives laid out the deceased in his or her own home. Death was considered a part of life, and accepted.
It may have been WWI that changed all that, with so many young men dying far from home.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 10:53 AM
Vero, my Uncle was laid out in the house in 2002. My Aunt place a half of whisky on the casket. One for the Road.
We are still doing that in Scotland.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 10:56 AM
The next step was having the deceased laid out in church, or in a side chapel, if it was a large church. When embalming really caught on, I guess it was just easier to have the whole process take place at one location, rather than schlepping the dearly departed around.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 10:58 AM
I like the custom of using the private home. I also like the whisky idea, Mgt. I shall have to remember that one, if I ever have to plan such an event for Husband.
I'd say "God forbid," but I have to be realistic, and, statistically, women tend to live longer, particularly when I've quit smoking, and he still has a three-pack-a-day ahbit.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 11:07 AM
Those FBI body farms are being show on tv here, Vero. I'm freaked out, but I keep watching. Suppose I want to know what happens to the body when we die.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 11:09 AM
Mgt, there is an excellent book out called Stiff: The Curious Life Of Human Cadavers by Mary Roach.
It has a lot of interesting history in it.
Posted by: Lisa | November 20, 2006 11:13 AM
I like the whisky idea too, Vero.
It made me smile and not feel so bad about sending him on. I have a really great family.
At all family occasions the children get up to sing or do a dance or read a poem. Everybody has to do something. It is a scream going to Fireman John's Mum for birthdays or Christmas. Such fun.
It only made sense that she would send Uncle John off with a smile on her face. She is a really good woman.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 11:15 AM
Thanks Lisa. It gives me the willies but I am quite interested.
Kind of like watching the first televised open heart surgery by Christian Barnard.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 11:23 AM
I remember getting up to perform. It's a holdover from Victorian times, when any "lady" or "gentleman" was supposed to develop such entertaining skills.
It was always poetry recitations from me. My lack of musical ability manifested itself at a very early age.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 11:25 AM
Ha, ha. I used to have to sing with my Dad, Vero. I was painfully shy.
I would sit on his lap and sing little, squeaky parts into his neck, of Jeanette McDonald while my Dad sang Nelson Eddie. My Dad was a trained singer - beautiful voice.
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 11:30 AM
BTW, Carolyn, I did my due diligence to remove reference to your real name and admirable son from Usenet. Despite the fact that your disparaging and harassing comments about me are all over cyberspace and remain there.
I suggest you remove the log from your own eye before you continue to remark on the speck in mine. I have done my best to remove what I can. You and others have removed nothing.
At this point, the time wasted on this discussion is already too much. If you can't mop up your room, I don't see how you can threaten me and harass me to mop up mine.
Please find another target for your misdirected rage and contempt. I do not have time for it and I will not put up with it.
Posted by: loretta | November 20, 2006 11:33 AM
Also, Carolyn, if you do a search on your name in Google and click on "Groups" to search all the Usenet groups, you will find no results on that search in Usenet. If you find any, they may not be my posts. I deleted all I could find.
Posted by: loretta | November 20, 2006 11:37 AM
Have a good one, everybody.
Ciao!
Posted by: Mgt | November 20, 2006 12:01 PM
About the fax/printout possibly being for work, the quickest way would be to call the person who sent it--not ask someone to drive to your home to retrieve it.
Since he was an in-house sales person for a medical records company, any pricing/quote information he would need for a client would be available from his company I would imagine.
Posted by: CountryGal | November 20, 2006 12:58 PM
I can't imagine him not having a laptop to demonstrate their product to prospective clients and the ability to log into their mainframe for any information needed.
Heck, I use GoToMyPc but I'm sure he would have access to a VPS at the very least for remote usage.
Posted by: CountryGal | November 20, 2006 01:14 PM
Thanks for your cooperation, Loretta. I removed my comments to/about you on Usenet and don't ever intend to speak your name in a way that can be associated with your real life. I already said that in Muttville but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that maybe you didn't see it.
Posted by: Ntegrity | November 20, 2006 01:47 PM
Thank you. I don't read Muttville.
Posted by: loretta | November 20, 2006 03:13 PM
It is my understanding Jason Young has not been very forthcoming with information, perhaps from advice from his lawyer... my guess for the reason we have not seen or heard much new evidence is LE having to track down the paper trail (reciepts, phone records, bills, etc) and all other information to put there time table together.
You would think at this point if Jason had a clear explaination for his where abouts, distance and paper to back that up, we would have heard something by now... 18 days? It should be fairly easy to rule him out and since that does not seem to be the case he will continue to have the "dark cloud" hanging over him.
Posted by: Concerned Citizen | November 20, 2006 03:45 PM
Exactly, Concerned Citizen.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 03:54 PM
His apologists must realize that as well as the rest of us.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 04:08 PM
Poor OJ. His book and special was cancelled.
/sarcasm
Posted by: CountryGal | November 20, 2006 04:49 PM
Oh darn. And I had it on pre-release order at Amazon, too.
NOT! HA HA HA ! As if.
I wouldn't give that guy the dust from my Swiffer.
Another book that disappeared from availability was that Scott Peterson tell-all on Lulu. POOF. Gone without a trace. I must speculate that Katheryne (sp?) got a Cease & Desist.
Posted by: loretta | November 20, 2006 05:28 PM
The author was/is Kathrynne Belmont and even the thread on the Canadian Anti-DP site has gone POOF.
Mysterious! I guess she won't be submitting it to the blooker awards, eh?
Posted by: loretta | November 20, 2006 05:33 PM
I can see why the OJ book could disappear, but I don't understand the Peterson one.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 06:49 PM
What could Peterson tell us that we don't already know without incriminating himself? He would have had to do an "If I did it" book and I doubt his lawyers would encourage that.
Posted by: Barbara | November 20, 2006 08:17 PM
I'm glad to see that the killer was considerate enough to close the baby safe gate at the top of the stairs. Otherwise, there probably would have been two funerals.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 20, 2006 08:38 PM
Wow. Really, Joe? Where did you read that? If that's true, it does not bode well for Mr. "He Would Never Do Such A Thing."
Posted by: loretta | November 20, 2006 08:41 PM
Well it occurred to me that the baby's room was upstairs and she was not killed in a fall down the stairs.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 20, 2006 08:42 PM
Interesting if true Joe. It seems odd that burglar would mess with a gate.
Of course I have one up to keep my dog out of the family room from time to time and I just step over it rather than mess with opening it.
Posted by: Barbara | November 20, 2006 08:45 PM
Joe, was Michelle and Jason's room upstairs as well?
Posted by: CountryGal | November 20, 2006 08:46 PM
I'd like to know where Jason's office/fax/printer was located in the house as well.
Posted by: CountryGal | November 20, 2006 08:47 PM
All bedrooms upstairs, don't know where office is, I'm thinking downstairs.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 20, 2006 08:54 PM
I have a baby the same age and we don't use a baby gate anymore. Haven't for about 6 months. They probably didn't have one as well.
Posted by: james | November 20, 2006 08:55 PM
Sometimes you have to float a rumor to get at the truth. Perhaps someone who knows the information will knock it down. It stands to reason that there was a gate there... and the baby is not dead. My bet is that the killer cared for the baby, not the wife.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 20, 2006 09:04 PM
That's hard to say Joe. I didn't use a baby gate. Some babies are safer not having a gate because they would just try to climb over it. If they know how to go down the stairs safely, it's not a necessity. I don't think that's a serious clue, but that's just me.
Posted by: Barbara | November 20, 2006 09:06 PM
I believe that the killer hated the wife and perhaps loved the baby, maybe because the baby was his.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 20, 2006 09:13 PM
I like your thinking Captain Joe - if it is true that they had a baby gate and it was closed, then I think it would be an interesting clue.
Posted by: james | November 20, 2006 09:16 PM
I'm not ready to give into that one yet. The killer may not have even been concerned about the baby.
We had a purse snatching in our area Friday. It was broad daylight at a shopping mall. A mother was strapping her toddler into the car seat in the back of her van when a man came up and started punching her in the face. He did some serious damage to her. He did get away with the purse but it was the toddler's "Little Kitty" purse so I doubt he got much.
The point is that he was eliminating the adult to get what he wanted. He didn't touch the toddler even though he had no connection to her.
Posted by: Barbara | November 20, 2006 09:18 PM
Remember, the baby wasn't in the car during the car accident last year. I wonder who made that arrangement. Don't you think Jason said "Let Grammy keep the baby while I take you on a beautifull scenic drive, Dear."
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 20, 2006 09:20 PM
I'm not sure Joe. I can only relate everything to my own situation. Some questions come up and I think, "If that was me, MY husband would be under this same scrutiny!"
He doesn't call me constantly when he's out of town. We often went out without our 2-year-old. I have have injuries to the extent that I was questioned by the emergency room staff as to whether or not my husband had abused me. (I'm a klutz, what can I say?) Sometimes things just are what they are. I need more.
The fax/print out/whatever bothers me more than anything else because no matter how hard I try, I can't come up with a "why?".
Posted by: Barbara | November 20, 2006 09:27 PM
First I would like to tell you what a great site this is. I read it daily and it is one of the few forums that don't contain a lot of profanity, name calling and insults. I noticed a few things that seem to be unclear.
1. I watched the interview Greta did with the Sheriff. She specificaly asked him if Jason had given his DNA and fingerprints willingly or if he was forced to comply with a warrant. He made a point of saying that he gave them willingly but that a warrant was obtain because it's required in these circumstances.
2. Much is being made of this fax/print out the SIL went to the house for. While I agree if Jason did this, he may have wanted her to discover Michelle and to take care of the daughter. It is also possible it is just a coincidence too. Maybe he was looking to buy Michelle something while he was away? Maybe from a store that they don't have in their area? Could be for Xmas, Birthday,anniversary, or "just because"? Maybe he had printed off info from the internet for something he knew she wanted and forgot to take it with him? He calls SIL and asks her if she would mind going by and getting it for him, knowing she has a key?
3.The sheriff Geta interviewed stated the friend left at 10:30 (obviously she has been interviewed). He also said that the rigor mortis seemed to indicated she was killed between 12-6 am. I have not read anywhere what time Jason actually left, only that it was while the friend was still there. So sometime before 10:30pm right? He called her from VA around 11pm which will easily be verified or disputed by phone records. If he used his cell phone his location can be traced by cell towers.
4. I am in law enforcement and it is not unusual that there has been little said by police at this point. Just because they aren't saying anything doesn't mean they haven't verified his where abouts. As for his lawyer or him not giving statement about his alibi....IF he is innoccent the shock and grief he is feeling is unimagineable and I doubt very much he feel like defending himself to the world. Scott Peterson wouldn't shut up and he was guilty as hell.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 20, 2006 09:37 PM
Welcome, CanadianGirl. Yes, we are civil around here and it will always remain that way. If someone gets gnarly, well, I just throw them out. LOL
I am not suspicious of the DNA or anything else requiring a warrant, either.
I would advise my client to remain silent at this stage, even if he were innocent. That's not bothering me as much as it does some other people.
But the fax - well, that's just the biggest red flag of all. It doesn't make any sense. I don't buy it.
Posted by: loretta | November 20, 2006 09:46 PM
Hi CanadianGirl. Like Loretta I'm not bothered by the DNA or lawyering up as I have previously stated. And as much as it frustrates me I am glad that there hasn't been much reported in the Media about the investigation. I hope this means they are building a rock solid case without the major problems that sometimes exist in other high profile cases. It could also mean that they just don't have the goods on any suspect.
I'm bothered by the fax/printout and the fact that LE and/or the Media hasn't leaked that Jason submitted to a lie detector test and passed. If he had, I am certain his lawyer would have leaked it to the media to steer public suspicion away from him.
Posted by: Monica` | November 20, 2006 10:02 PM
CannuckGal
The husband looks dirty in this case. My theory is that he is in the closet. He has a gay friend, Fussell, who is "leaking" info which exonerates him, i.e. he was in Virgunia when the hit, uh, murder took place.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 20, 2006 10:49 PM
A friend of ours (Bexma) that posts here sometimes just sent me this on the Drunken Drownings:
The reason I'm writing is to give you a big thumbs up. You were right all those months ago about the college boys being killed in the midwest in the water by a serial killer. On Greta tonight, they mentioned that it's now a serial killer on the loose. Eight men found dead in the Mississippi River in the last nine years. So you go, girl!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I also heard from Peg last week about this. One of the victims, Chris Jenkins, was determined to be a homicide - 4 years later.
The family conducted their own investigation and hired their own private detective, and thinks that the breakthrough has much to do with having a new Minneapolis Chief of Police.
There may be more than one individual involved and more details to follow on Monday.
Posted by: loretta | November 20, 2006 10:53 PM
Thanks to Monica for this link re: the Midwest Drowning Mystery:
Posted by: loretta | November 20, 2006 10:56 PM
Joe, I have friends who are Lesbians. They know I'm not. Doesn't stop us from being friends.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 11:06 PM
You might need bugmenot dot com to read the article. I found it on google and it opened up the first time but not the second.
Posted by: Monica` | November 20, 2006 11:07 PM
Thanks for the warm welcome. I agree the husband is the most likely suspect as you all have pointed out the statistics lean that way. I truly hope not for cassie's sake though. It would be nice to know more about this fax/print out that led to the sister arriving and finding Michelle. It does raise a red flag, but then there could be a hundred different explanations for it too. I'm sure police have all the info about it by now. I guess we will have to wait and see.
Captain....lol well if he's in the closet I would bet my last dollar there will be proof of it on his computer. Gay porn sites maybe?? While I am sure his friend doesn't think he is guilty I would hope the statements he is making are truthful or he will be drawing attention to himself by law enforcement.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 20, 2006 11:16 PM
Hi, all. Been a long, long time and I can't stay this time, either. I'll try to get back later. Love that you're talking about the newest scumbag husband in NC. We all KNOW he's guilty, don't we. Good to be back, all of you old timers. And can't wait to get to know all the newcomers.
Posted by: bexxma | November 20, 2006 11:28 PM
Vero
There are a few other things pointing at the closet, the red tie and sunglasses during the funeral, but the evidence, I admit, is thin. Another friend and former partner, looks like he may be that way. But it may all be innocent because of the plethora of them in academia and metro areas. I know Austin is lousy with them, right?
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 20, 2006 11:32 PM
Joe, Joe, Joe.
To me, in theater, it makes about as much difference as a preference for peas over green beans.
The red tie at the funeral bothers me, as I'm of the old school. One wears, if not black, at least a subdued colour to the funeral of a loved one. The sunglasses are OK, as I might want to hide my eyes if they were all puffy.
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 11:42 PM
Bexx, it is very good to hear from you after so long! Please come back when you can stay.
And, yes, I tend to think he's guilty, though he is being much cagier about it than SP was.
I think the so-and-so's are getting smarter, dang it!
Posted by: vero | November 20, 2006 11:44 PM
Vero, I have nothing against gays either, I'm just looking for motive. Perhaps a jealous lover (gay) intervened. Perhaps Michelle discovered his real proclivities and wanted a divorce. Who knows. Whoever killed her had a deep grudge.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 20, 2006 11:48 PM
As a motive, it could be a factor. I tend to forget that a person's sexual orientation means a lot more to some folks than it does to me.
Maybe we'll hear more about this in the next few days.
Posted by: vero | November 21, 2006 12:04 AM
I agree with you there Captain. The killing is "personal". I know you all have read other forums on this case; i'm curious if any of Jasons friends have offered up their theories on who did this? In light of the recent trial of Scott Dyleski, it' not impossible that it was a neighbour, but even in that case there was a link to the victim albeit not one you would think could be cause for murder. He already had a fascination with death and violence; I wonder if there is anyone in the neighbourhood like that.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 12:07 AM
A 15 year old neighbor male with emotional problems lives next door. He has a slightly older friend who lives in the trailer park behind the Young house. They have been building a fort in the trees there behind the Young house. Jason had a runin with those in the trailer park, loud noises, etc. Possible perps.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 21, 2006 12:14 AM
Don't know if the youngsters are goths.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 21, 2006 12:16 AM
The only problem with it being youngsters is that they would be more likely to leave evidence. I think that there would have been a fairly quick arrest if a teenager was involved. Not too many I have known are that good at planning things out and I don't think they would be able to withstand a police interrogation without cracking.
Posted by: Monica` | November 21, 2006 12:26 AM
Well thats certainly interesting. The husband is a more likely suspect; but it's worth looking into. I imagine LE will check it out. Interesting to see who's finger prints they find. Kids are less likely to think about fingerprints. I have to say my gut tells me it's not a "hit". If there are holes and gaps in Jasons timeline I think he's likely going to be the main suspect. If not though, I don't think he's involved. JMO of course.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 12:27 AM
With that being said, there are a lot of teenagers with angst and rage. I have grey hairs to prove it.
I was never more thrilled than when mine turned 20. LOL
Posted by: Monica` | November 21, 2006 12:31 AM
I'm not ruling out a *hit* just yet CanadianGirl. Remember, Rabbi Neulander's wife was bludgeoned to death. I believe he hired one of his goon acquantances.
I guess it all depends on if the crime scene was stagged to look like a robbery and LE can tell.
Posted by: Monica` | November 21, 2006 12:40 AM
If the Captain is correct about the teens building a tree fort behind the Young's house, that could account for Jason's friend saying that his dogs were barking out back when he visited the residence.
Good night, everyone. I didn't realize how late it was.
Posted by: Monica` | November 21, 2006 12:44 AM
Monica, I hear you! I have 2 boys 16 & 17. So much info we don't know yet, like what was the murder weapon? Anything missing? Signs of a struggle, maybe DNA under her fingernails etc.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 12:45 AM
I have not read at other forums. I read extensively and posted at CTV and WS during the Peterson trial, and I found that the language and abrasive confrontation that abounds over there affected me to the extent that I was responding in kind. I have vowed to go no more there.
That said, it seems that Jason's supporters were all over most forums, defending him much as they did here, and then vanished from all venues at the same time. We were thinking that his lawyer may have asked them to stop.
Posted by: vero | November 21, 2006 12:47 AM
I have three children, two grown and one still home. Both my girls (ages 25 and 29) went through a "goth" or "grunge" phase. They deny both labels, but they had the hair of many colours and the black clothes, or nasty jeans and flannel shirts. Both have tattoos, though they got those after they were of age. Both had some experience with drugs. I am happy to report that both are now productive members of society, with decent jobs; one is attending college, and the educational plans of the other are temporarily on hold while she and her long-term partner have a baby.
Not all "goths" turn out like the guy who killed Taylor Behl.
Posted by: vero | November 21, 2006 12:53 AM
If Jason isn't helping LE with the investigation (ie-what if anything is missing or out of place in the house) then how will they know if it was a robbery? He's out west with his parents and daughter. Michelle's family might put pressure on him to help out. The trail is getting cold unless there is plenty of forensic evidence. Hopefully there will be and it will be solved shortly.
Posted by: CountryGal | November 21, 2006 12:54 AM
Thats very true vero, can't judge a book by it's cover. It's whats inside the book that tells the story. All kids go thru phases trying to fit in and explore who they are. If they have a morbid fascination with death or gore and violence, it should then be cause for concern.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 12:59 AM
CountryGal
Do we know what condition the house was in? I know the little one tracked blood thru the house but i am wondering if things were broken, knocked over etc. I don't imagine Jason has been allowed back into the house with the police only recently releasing the scene. Until he is allowed inside how would he know if anything is missing?
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 01:04 AM
Shoot! My husband would be hard-pressed to identify missing objects from our house, unless it was his computer. He can't even find a potato peeler, which is why we now have three.
Posted by: vero | November 21, 2006 01:20 AM
Hi CanadianGirl. Seems, like us, you must have read "the friends" posts about calling at 11:00 pm and his sister having a key - as those are the only people that pushed that out there. What confusion those posts caused! Not for one moment do I think LE 'banned' JY from the house. He lawyered up immediately and handed in what he was ordered to do so and as the Sheriff said, the talk was brief. I think this man absolutely no concerted effort to help in anyway and left his SIL and MY's family to determine what, if anything, was missing. As in all other cases (take Amy Rocha, for example) a close family member would have performed a 'walk-though-don't touch' investigation; escorted by the relevant authorities with copious notes being taken. Anyway, I am sure with you being in LE, you automatically know this. Quite honestly, I find it cold and callous that, supposedly 'deeply in love and very happy' - that he deserted Michelle's family at the lowest point in their lives. He offered NOTHING, not even a feigned hug at the funeral. That's one selfish, hideous characteristic and only worsened his image, IMO.
Are you in Canada - or do you originate from Canada, lol? If so, it this case is up there, too? Good. Let te world descend upon these ungodly, heathen murders!
Posted by: JustPassing | November 21, 2006 01:32 AM
Lol, vero! Hee hee. My SO would be able to determine BIG TICKET items that he deemed valuable as missing, such as the audiovisual remote and his toothbrush, lol! I know, I know, he'd be able to comment on the state of the place, though. Had to chuckle along with you. Scott was a RARITY splabbing his mouth off. JY's lawyers have probably forbidden him to talk to media as a result of SP. After all - without SP's babble, we'd have little to comment about. Such a high prof criminal-defense attie and the strained silence speaks volumes, imo. This Sheriff "knows how to hold 'em, knows how to fold 'em and not to walk away!" MOO of course :)
Posted by: JustPassing | November 21, 2006 01:37 AM
One more and very sorry to triple post. Wild horses wouldn't keep my husband's pain and demands to know more - with or without any lawyer. He'd be falling into my family and our friends arms and they'd unite. (And vice-versa!!!)
Posted by: JustPassing | November 21, 2006 01:42 AM
Captain...good catch about the neighborhood "yuts".....
I would have guessed that the cops would have run some dogs in the area trying to track a scent...it seems that would lead them to the 'yuts' but who knows......
Posted by: lee | November 21, 2006 02:24 AM
Good morning all.
Hi CanadianGirl - nice of you to comment on how our hostess keeps a respectful "tone" around here. Nice to know you can make a comment and be treated with civility.
As for Jason, I'm even more convinced he is guilty now that he is hiding from Michelle's parents.
Taking their Granddaughter away at a time like this, is suspicious. Surely, he knows the child is the only part of their daughter they have left.
Jason is sounding more like Michael Peterson, a closet gay. The bloody death scene, etc.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 04:11 AM
What took LE so long to get on the serial killer wagon? The neatly folded clothes didn't do it for them?
Lazy b*stards!
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 04:27 AM
LE hate the idea of a serial killer. The puplic panics. Also, the police have to cooperate with other agencies and deal with the press. Not a pretty picture. Much nicer to have it be accidental, individual cases of kids wandering into the river.
Posted by: vero | November 21, 2006 08:12 AM
Incarcerated witness/suspect *informant* provided information about Jenkin's murder/drowning.
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=533270
Another article says a break in the case came as a result of a new police chief being elected. Fresh eyes so to speak. Jenkin's family moved to Minnesota after his death and hired a private investigator.
Good morning.
Posted by: Monica` | November 21, 2006 08:17 AM
Well good morning all. What a friendly welcoming bunch you all are here. Yes I am Canadian born and raised and still living here thanks for asking. I don't know if I would say this case is "up here" too as you said. LOL I like you all just have an interst in cases like these. Helps keep my mind running for my job too. I don't usually post on the forums I read but you are all so friendly and the hostess runs a very tight ship, taking out the trash on a regular basis, I might pull up a chair and stay awhile.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 09:21 AM
Good morning, CG. We have another "CG" here (CountryGirl) so I might have to make you CG2 or CGToo.
Some of us have been together almost 4 years, most for over 2. I've had this blog since January 2003 before there were many blogs discussing true crime. I don't just focus on that, but certain cases draw me in.
Over the past almost 4 years, I have read/seen a lot of spousal murders and we closely watched the Peterson cases - both the California one and the North Carolina one, as well as the Hacking case, the Blagg trial, and were relieved when that POS Perry March was finally convicted.
Spousal murder is a particular interest of mine and those here. We also discuss a few child murder cases, but those are really tough to follow. There's a case in California that's going to be in its second trial in a couple months - you can find all you want to know about that one in another blog we have:
http://cameron-brown.blogspot.com/
Just start from the beginning of the archives and go from there.
It's nice to have some new blood in here and I welcome all new people to jump in! We have a lot of fun here.
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 09:30 AM
We do have a lot of good fun.
We speculate, google and pun.
We can put up a link
And say what we think
Without coming under the gun.
Posted by: vero | November 21, 2006 09:40 AM
Hey Vero. I love your little ditties. They are so clever and always make me smile.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 09:59 AM
Thanks Loretta for the info. I also have an interest in reading about spousal murders and missing and murdered children. I confess I enjoy reading the posts on the various forums too, it's interesting to me how different people think. I get a lot of insight into the human mind and how it works just reading the various ideas, theories and opinions posted.
vero
Very clever I like it.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 10:02 AM
Off topic, but regarding the Trenton Duckett disappearance - I wish I could latch on to the idea that he was still alive and that his mother sold him or gave him to someone between the time she was seen with him in the Wendy's drive-thru and 20 minutes later.
If that timeline is correct, it does seem too short a time to do anything like murder/body disposal.
However, this is Florida and they have swamps and stuff that wouldn't require much to get rid of something.
I don't see how someone could have that child and not return it at this point. I dunno. I wish I could believe he was still alive. I'm just very skeptical.
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 10:03 AM
Good morning!
It's nice to see Bexx back and welcome to Canadian Girl!
Posted by: Thumper | November 21, 2006 10:17 AM
Good morning, Thumper.
I see you are still carrying out your good deeds. Your friend Captain Joe almost made me doubt that Jason Young was guilty of killing his wife.
Then, I thought about his behaviour.
No anger toward the killers?
Doing nothing to help with the investigation?
Lost his job? I think his boss knows something about the "supposed" meeting.
He's guilty.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 10:51 AM
Actually, If I had a farm, I'd risk the bet.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 10:53 AM
Good morning all!
I missed the information about him losing his job..
Mgt, can you help?
Posted by: fourier | November 21, 2006 10:56 AM
Sorry, fourier! I am just picking up snippets from comments made about him not working for Chart-something-or-other. I think it is Capt Joe who has the info.
Sorry to get your hopes up. I could have my facts wrong but I'm almost sure I read that he was no longer working for the company.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 11:00 AM
If I knew which news papers to google, I'd be on it.
Frustrating, just doesn't cut it as a description.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 11:02 AM
Our local newspaper is http://www.newsobserver.com
Not that helpful, but maybe that is what you're looking for?
Posted by: fourier | November 21, 2006 11:07 AM
Good morning.
CanadianGirl, and others, welcome! You will love it here. Our hostess is an excellent writer, and you will find it informative, fun, sometimes pithy and entertaining to read here.
If I may hazard a guess, it would be LE knows exactly who committed this murder, and are building their case. They've been so mum about leaking info, and there's no reward being offered. They've said the citizens don't have to worry about some monster murderer.
Posted by: Val | November 21, 2006 11:07 AM
newsobserver.com would be the best source because it's the local paper there. If you type in "Jason Young" in the search box on the main page it will take you to a list of all the articles about this case. The most recent article was on Nov. 17. Nothing since then that I could find.
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 11:10 AM
Thanks fourier. I am usually here when everyone else is asleep. I get a bit bored waiting.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 11:13 AM
justPassing....My insider folks in Raleigh are telling me Michelle's Mother is absolutely convinced JY is the killer.
If that is the case, it explains why there was no "loving contact" at the funeral. He would obviously avoid her totally so there was no potential scene
Posted by: RPD | November 21, 2006 11:17 AM
Thank you RPD. His behaviour is exactly what I would expect of a guilty man. He is just avoiding, everything.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 11:20 AM
RPD, do you know whether he has lost his job, and why?
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 11:22 AM
RPD... sigh! I wish we knew what they were waiting on. It's got to be torture to her family- this lack of apparent progress. Friends are sad, but can probably move on a bit easier than her poor family.
Thanks for the updates.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 21, 2006 11:24 AM
Mornin' Mgt!
ChartOne issued a statement regarding the loss of Michelle. I don't recall anything being confirmed about the loss of Jason's empolyment. I thought that was a rumor.
Posted by: Thumper | November 21, 2006 11:30 AM
Thanks Thumper. That is what I get for picking up stompies. Put in my place. LOL
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 11:33 AM
Not sure about the prior relationship between the Mother and JY...I will call my contact tonight and update later (Sorority Sister of MY)
It would seem very odd if he lost his job at this point...unless they know he lied to LE about having a sales appointment Friday am ? ...doubtful
Posted by: RPD | November 21, 2006 11:33 AM
Good morning, everyone. Knowing the dogged persistence of news reporters, I find it very strange that so little IS being reported. Specifically, neighbors, co-workers, etc. Someone usually comes forward for whatever reason and speaks to them.
Posted by: Wench | November 21, 2006 11:41 AM
You'r right, Wench. This one is wearing its waterproofs.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 11:46 AM
re: Mom and JY, they appeared friendly at the wedding. That's all I know, though.
Posted by: fourier | November 21, 2006 11:46 AM
His true colours are bound to have been exposed since then, fourier.
She must have a reason to believe that he is capable of this.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 11:52 AM
Heading for home. Please let the rain have stopped1 Once I get wet I'm chilled to the bone. Urgh!
Ciao, everyone.
Posted by: Mgt | November 21, 2006 11:54 AM
Have a great evening, Mgt!
Posted by: Thumper | November 21, 2006 12:03 PM
Cozy wishes your way, Mgt. The Highlands may be beautiful but I'm sure it takes a strong constitution to live there. Take care of yourself, dear.
Posted by: Wench | November 21, 2006 12:09 PM
I find it odd so little is being said by anyone about this case. I expect LE to keep it close to the vest, but we aren't hearing comments from family, friends, co-workers or neighbours. Does anyone know if reporters are digging?
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 12:41 PM
Loretta
Sadly I agree with you about the Duckette boy. If he's alive I for one see no reason for his mother to have committed suicide. I really can't imagine someone keeping him hidden with all this media attention, once she killed herself I think he would have been turned over very quickly. I hope I am wrong but it doesn't look good.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 12:44 PM
Greetings and appreciate your note to us all in here, RPD. I felt JY's dismal attitude at the funeral screamed volumes as action speak louder than words. There was almost a subtle 'insult' in another of his actions: collecting Cassie and whisking her away as instantly as he fled. But that's just my view, of course. LE's silence is equally telling. There has been no tip line offered and LE stopped asking for info/sighting of a vehicle/anything suspicious a week ago. (They don;t have to ask if they've got what they want.) I say Kudos to this sheriff. If he's talking Turkey - then Thursday is Cooking Day! I .... WONDER! Go well. JP (and kudos to the hostess here). I feel we may be apalled at what all we'll learn about the squeaky clean JY. JMHO, MOO, IMO etc.
Posted by: JustPassing | November 21, 2006 02:53 PM
In following the Chris Jenkins case, just one small obervation comes to me about the road blocks his family mudt have faced in bringing him justice.
Even now the newspaper is citing his blood alcohol as being almost 33% above the legal limit. In 2002, the limit was .10 so I guess that makes him more sober. Those limits are imposed on drivers. These boys were walking so those standards really don't apply.
It is so strange to see a family looking relieved at a press conference announcing their son's homicide.
Welcome to the new posters.
Posted by: Peggy | November 21, 2006 03:00 PM
Family Of Dead Mom's Missing Boy Sues CNN, Nancy Grace
http://www.wral.com/entertainment/10371350/detail.html
Posted by: Thumper | November 21, 2006 03:03 PM
Yes it's always someone elses fault when a person makes the selfish decision to commit suicide. Maybe Joshua can sue Melinda's family for the loss of his son? Would make about the same amount of sense I think. No one forced her to do that interview. Did she think she was going to asked about the plot of the movie she watched? LOL
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 03:17 PM
Hello CanadianGirl. It's good to see some new posters.
After hearing more details about Melinda's secret film "career", I'd wonder if she wasn't making a movie when Trenton "disappeared" instead of watching one.
I'm wondering if someone was trying to blackmail her. If she gave Trenton to someone as payment, it's unlikely they'd return him.
Maybe it's a crazy theory, but Melinda wasn't exactly a stable person.
Posted by: Nadine | November 21, 2006 04:35 PM
I'm glad to see that LE is finally looking at a serial killer in the LaCrosse drownings. It's about darned time. I hope this person or persons will be caught. Too many young lives have been lost there already.
Posted by: Nadine | November 21, 2006 04:46 PM
Actually, I think Nancy Grace DID ask about the movie!
I think the CNN lawyers will squash that case like a bug, but you never know.
One thing is for sure, some wrongful death lawyer is drooling over the possibilities.
Vultures.
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 06:56 PM
Re: The red tie...
Both MY & JY were graduates of NC State. Their colors are red & white.
You have to understand the love of college sports in the area to fully appreciate the rivalry btwn NCSU, UNC & Duke.
MY was a cheerleader her freshman year. One article mentioned them taking the child to the home football games in her cheerleading uniform. One can even get a casket w/the school insignia.
I have no idea if JY did it or not. But the red tie talk just drove me to posting! Anyone wearing my school colors at my funeral would be honoring me. The UNC fight song includes "Tarheel born, Tarheel bred and when I die, I'm a Tarheel dead."
IMO, there is NOTHING to the red tie. Back to lurking.
ps: Thanks, Loretta.
Posted by: lurkyloo | November 21, 2006 06:57 PM
I sort of mentioned something to that effect before, Lurkyloo. There is a lot that can be read into tiny details that have nothing to do with anything. If something were to happen to me, my husband would be a suspect not because the husband is always the prime suspect but because of a lot of things that have discussed here. I can't accuse someone because of some of the things mentioned, but the fax/printout thing still makes me say, "Hmmmmmmmm".
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 07:01 PM
That's a very reasonable explanation, Lurky.
I never gave the tie much thought, but then again, I am not one to pay a lot of attention to clothing. I pay more attention to words.
I wish I could hear Jason talk or read a transcript of things he said. I can analyze his words better than his tie color.
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 07:02 PM
I agree w/others that say the local chatter is non-existent. That is very weird to me!!!
I am dialing people while I lurk. LOL. Nothing. grrrr
In the Abora (sp?), I was able to get some scoop but can't find a connection in this story.
Posted by: lurkyloo | November 21, 2006 07:07 PM
If you have any inside info in the Abora case, I'll all ears (eyes). That case has bothered me ever since I heard about it. I hate that it's not solved.
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 07:09 PM
There was a flurry of rumors in the early days of the Peterson case, most proved untrue, and I am resisting passing along any unreliable info I am reading at other boards.
I don't want to waste the energy debating if Jason had a girlfriend or was gay or had some kind of secret life.
The only thing I sense for sure is possible financial problems. If he's involved in this, I'll bet we'll find out he was in hock for something, and it could very well be related to that sports theme: gambling.
We'll have to wait and see. I smell MONEY as the root of this evil.
A big insurance policy, especially an accidental death one with double indemnity, could be worth a cool million or two.
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 07:11 PM
And speaking of motives, I don't see anyone else with a motive. Even in the Dylseki case, he had some connection to the victim, and more than was let on at the trial, too.
There does not appear to be a random killer/serial killer motive here. The MO is all wrong. Serial killers don't operate this way, and punk kids would leave a big trail, IMO.
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 07:14 PM
I have trouble seeing money as the motive but I think that's because I've never cared about it. If I had an addiction that was related to money, I would probably see things differently.
I'll be interested in seeing how this comes out. I sure hope that it's solved (unlike the Abora case).
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 07:15 PM
You can't think like you, you gotta think like THEM, Barbara! heh
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 07:18 PM
I taught junior high for too many years. I can't allow myself to think like others. That's what I go online. (You KNOW I always get these things wrong.)
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 07:20 PM
I have read too many books on serial killers. I have learned to find patterns in their behavior and their thinking.
This does not look like a serial killing.
The 'drunken drownings' DEFINITELY do.
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 07:22 PM
I have to go soon but will try to post back later tonight (or def. tomorrow) abt Abora.
Re: financial problems, what makes you sense that, Loretta? FWIW, the property taxes in Wake County are not past due until 1/7/07. We don't pay ours until 12/31 of every year. Most everyone I know does the same.
I am going to remain on the fence getting splinters in my a$$. LOL. It doesn't look good for JY. However, a small part of me thinks is innocent.
Another big case in Raleigh was the murder of Eric Miller. It took years for his wife, Claire, to be arrested for his poisoning. She was remarried and living in Wilmington when she was arrested. Interesting case to google.
Have a great evening. I hope someone will summarize the NG show. Pretty please :)
Posted by: lurkyloo | November 21, 2006 07:23 PM
If it turns out that he's guilty, the fax/print out may have been his biggest mistake. I only say that because I don't know what forensic evidence he left behind. I'm thinking not much or he'd be in jail right now.
After all, OJ got away with it. Crap can happen.
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 07:25 PM
It's not the property tax, or the real estate issues.
It's just a hunch. The new job, the new baby coming along (meaning that Michelle would have to take some maternity leave or even stay home for a couple of years since daycare for two small kids, especially an infant, is beau coup bucks), and other circumstances that lead me to believe maybe there was trouble in $$ paradise.
Just a hunch.
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 07:27 PM
I hope someone will summarize the NG show. Pretty please :)
Where are KN and Rose when we need them????
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 07:28 PM
When you kill your spouse in your own home, all your DNA is already all over the place.
If he had any blood anywhere else, that will be a problem. That's what I assume they are looking for.
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 07:29 PM
I'm thinking it could be an OJ thing and he got rid of the clothes he was wearing somewhere along the way. If he is guilty, that would be my guess.
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 07:31 PM
It should be easy to check his alibi. I'm wondering why there is NO news about this case. It is really dying on the vine.
Maybe there will be a break and we'll hear about it. My interpretation of this silence is that LE thinks JY is good for it and is building a case.
Posted by: loretta | November 21, 2006 07:33 PM
It makes me nervous because the same thing happened in Janet's case. I kept expecting to hear something because it seemed like they had some really good forensic evidence and then IT just died on the vine. I hope they find justice for both of them.
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 07:42 PM
Maybe there will be a break and we'll hear about it. My interpretation of this silence is that LE thinks JY is good for it and is building a case.
That's the way I see it, too. If they weren't trying to pull the case together against JY, there would be rewards offered for info and all kinds of media coverage asking for tips. I don't see any other scenario for the dead silence.
Posted by: Monica` | November 21, 2006 07:42 PM
It's as if there is a voluntary gag order.
As someone stated earlier, not even a reporter has been able to get close to a family member, friend, etc. Pretty strange.
Posted by: Thumper | November 21, 2006 07:43 PM
Co-worker, babysitter, neighbor, SOMEBODY. But sometimes silence is something that is beneficial to the case.
(Keep sending positive vibes for an outcome in this one.)
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 07:45 PM
We (I) were spelling it wrong. It's "Abaroa". Anyway, we didn't get justice for Janet, we didn't get justice for Nicole Brown and Ron Goldman, we have yet to get justice for several young men who have drowned under suspicious circumstances. I HOPE we get justice for Michelle.
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 07:50 PM
I hope we do as well, Barbara.
Posted by: Thumper | November 21, 2006 07:54 PM
I can't stay late and play, tonight, as I need to get some good rest. I did want to SHOUT out a big hello to, Bexxma. It's good to *see* you here (and everyone else) again. Thanks for the info on the college student drownings.
I'm probably going to be in your neck of the woods in late Jan or early Feb. It would be fantastic to get together again with you and Vero. I'd like to meet Captain Joe, as well. I think it would be fun.
Posted by: Monica` | November 21, 2006 07:54 PM
This article gives a little bit more info on the suit filed by the Duckett family today.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/11/21/nancygrace.sued/index.html
Posted by: Thumper | November 21, 2006 08:00 PM
No tip line, no reward. I guess LE doesn't need any help in solving this one. You would think that JY would still want to find the "real killer" a la OJ. Didn't snot or his family offer a reward?
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 21, 2006 09:22 PM
I can promise you that snot didn't. He was trying to keep a VERY low profile in the beginning. I think that Laci's mom offered the first reward. (Someone will correct me if I'm wrong.)
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 09:23 PM
Maybe it was the $1,000,000.00 insurance.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 21, 2006 09:25 PM
NG confirmed that the baby's bloody footprints only found in bedrooms. The hunch about the baby safe gate at the top of stairs being closed looks good.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 21, 2006 09:34 PM
So it looks like no new info came out of the NG show?
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 09:35 PM
CanadaGirl- are you in LE? I grew up in northern Maine two miles from the border with NB. Frequently visited there with relatives. We got Canadian TV before we got US TV.
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 21, 2006 10:05 PM
Gosh Joe! You must be an oldtimer! No cable? (When I tell kids about having 3 channels, in black and white no less, they think I'm lying.)
Posted by: Barbara | November 21, 2006 10:12 PM
Yeah, I'm retired. Anyone heard anything more from GrandmaBoo?
Posted by: Captain Joe | November 21, 2006 10:18 PM
NG was not on there tonight, Canadain Girl. JVM hosted.
There was a guest on that said that the reason it took so long to release the crime scene in the Young case was because they had to bring in "special equipment". We'll have to check the transcripts tomorrow. I didn't catch his name. Sorry.
Posted by: Thumper | November 21, 2006 10:30 PM
Captain - Yes I am in LE. I'm in Northern Ontario.
Thumper - Thanks for the info I wasn't able to watch it myself.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 21, 2006 11:16 PM
NG Show transcript:
ART HARRIS, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST: That`s right, Jane. All part of the time line they`re trying to reconstruct, you know, along with the forensic evidence. Today I spoke with Sam Pennica. He`s the director of the City County Bureau of Investigation. And they gather all the forensic evidence for the county, the state, the FBI.
They have had 19 investigators, you know, working that crime scene for 13 days, which is a lot longer than they normally do. They had to get a special machine, order one in -- that he wouldn`t tell me what that machine was for. But they are going over this with a fine-tooth comb.
Posted by: CountryGal | November 21, 2006 11:24 PM
re: NG show
I only caught a portion of the rerun. The TH commenting on the "specialized equipment" said he wasn't privilege to the type of equipment. His source of info on the comment didn't make him any more credible than a message bd poster. LOL
IIRC, A poster commented that the NG "breaking news" wouold be some angle debated to death on the net. Watching that show, I couldn't get the thought out of my head.
The GPS on the phone. IMO, the NG sub was saying that it could be traced - not that she knew any facts.
If the phone was turned off (or if the battery died) the only info one could get would be where the last signal came from and, after turning on or recharge, the location of the signal when it came back on.
Posted by: lurkyloo | November 21, 2006 11:30 PM
Thanks, CG!
They weren't up when I tried to find it earlier.
Night all!
Posted by: Thumper | November 21, 2006 11:47 PM
Sweet potato biscuits and other goodies here:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6514512
Posted by: Betsy Ross | November 21, 2006 11:48 PM
Is there a link to the transcript?
Posted by: vero | November 21, 2006 11:59 PM
Re: The tip line
I thought I saw on line or in the media - the number to the tip has been the Wake Co Sheriff #
Re: the activity btwn 12-6am, I have seen it as quoted many times as UNFAMILIAR vehicles. I have also seen it repeatedly printed as any vehicle. I am sure they just want any info or disclaimers they can gather.
However, I find it strange that many media reports -which get repeated on message boards - have left outthe "unfamiliar"portion of the comment.
Here is a quote from WRAL with both the tip line # and the "unfamiliar" description:
Investigators, however, have not named any suspects and ask that anyone who might have seen suspicious activity or unfamiliar vehicles in the area between midnight and 6 a.m. Friday to call the Wake County Sheriff's Office at 919-856-6800.
http://www.wral.com/news/10273399/detail.html
This case is just too strange, imo.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 22, 2006 12:00 AM
Thanks for the info, but Loretta doesn't permit anonymous posts. Please choose a nic so we can recognize you in the future.
Posted by: Betsy Ross | November 22, 2006 12:21 AM
Just the Facts has posted more info on the CTV boards. Some interesting points if they are the truth. I was going to paste it here but I thought I should make sure Loretta doesn't mind that first.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 12:25 AM
I think it would be all right to post a link to the post at CTV.
Posted by: vero | November 22, 2006 12:39 AM
Well I don't know how to post a link to a specific post from another message board so I will paste it here. If it's a no no here, I will take the slap on the hand from Loretta. LOL
just the facts
Member
Registered: Nov 2006
Location:
Posts: 2
misinformation and rumors
Please realize the following. There is a tremendous amount of misinformation and rumors out there, including a large number propagated by the media. When in my last post, I mentioned the damage done to the family and friends of the Youngs and Fishers by these cruel speculations I was pretty much told its your right to speculate and discuss. That may well be, but one would think rather than jumping to wild conclusions, you might want to be better informed. The truth isnt' nearly as exciting at the media melodrama. This is a sad, sad story, made even sadder by the media's attempt to reinvent this into the Peterson case. Its not. A terrible loss has been suffered here. If you want to speculate, please consider the following truths from someone who is close to these people on a daily basis.
As someone close to the family, I can tell you the following...
1) There is ***NO*** baby gate. I have been in this home many, many times and there is no baby gate. Cassie went up and down the stairs without issue and has for quite some time. The dog was free to be up or downstairs. If he was downstairs when Meredith entered the house, that was his choosing, not because he was kept behind a gate. Cassie was upstairs presumably because she was staying near her mother. She well may have walked up and down the stairs during the day. There is no baby gate!!!
2) There was no fax. None, zero, zilch. I don't know how much clearer to break it down. That's a media mistake which they continue to perpetuate. There was a print out that contained information on a purse Jason was interested in buying for Michelle. It was not bought yet. It was just the information he'd had printed out. He wanted input from her sister and friends before making the purchase. It was their 3rd anniversary and the 3rd year is leather. It was not unusual for he or Michelle to ask Meredith to do an errand for them. She originally moved the Raleigh area when Cassie was born to be their nanny when Cassie was younger. She lived nearby and frequently stayed at the home to take care of Cassie, took care of the dog, etc... She had a key to the home and no one else in the area did. It would be considered very normal for him to call her to do an errand, especially one that required being able to get in the house (since she had a key) despite the medias attempt to create a story out of that.
3) The police have never said there was no burglary. They have said there was no forced entry and from that people have assumed there was no theft. That is not the truth. Valuable items are missing from the home.
4) No lawyer was obtained for Jason until friends questioned by the police said the police were asking accusatory questions. The police made their intentions to treat him like a suspect from the beginning very clear during their interviews with his friends. That was brought to the attention of family members who recommended he get a lawyer. His step father was misquoted and no lawyer was obtained when he was at his mother's house.
5) The car wreck in the spring occurred when Jason thought the back of the SUV wasn't closed properly. He glanced back to look at that and his wheels went a little bit off the road. He over corrected the vehicle and that's when the wreck occurred. Despite the media's effort to make that into a huge story, there is no 100' drop off there where they went into the river. Michelle was not wearing her seat belt by her choice, not because he tried to trick her into taking it off. It was a wreck plain and simple. If having a wreck with your spouse in the vehicle is now considered an attempted murder, I guess hundreds of thousands of people nationwide are guilty.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 12:48 AM
re: anonymous posts
======================
Thanks for the info, but Loretta doesn't permit anonymous posts. Please choose a nic so we can recognize you in the future.
=====================
sorry for the error. I am new here. I only came out of lurking b/c of all the boards, this one seemed the most civil and logical.
I am not trying to defend JY. I don't know him.imo, there is something strange about this story and it is giving me painful splinters.
Perhaps lurking is best for me. Not everyone can post well. JMOO, ppl post well on this site.
Posted by: lurkyloo | November 22, 2006 12:57 AM
lurkyloo, please feel free. We just prefer addressing commenters by name, and, as each of us in unique, a nic of some sort is a good thing.
Canadian Girl, is that a recent post? Posted in the last 12 hours or so? Or is it older? There doesn't seem to be a lot of new info there.
I fail to see what difference it makes whether the printout was just that, or if it was a fax.
I also fail to see why Jason wouldn't realize that OF COURSE he is the first suspect in the murder of his wife. There's no point in being all surprised and offended at what is usual police procedure.
Part of the problem may be that Jason has never been suspected of anything in his whole life. If he has never been on the receiving end of a police investigation, their techniques may seem to be accusatory and abrasive.
Posted by: vero | November 22, 2006 01:12 AM
I call BS on the purse printout! Please! Have these people never used an email link? Sorry, asking your SIL to run errands like going to look at a purse print out when you can send a link to a web page is nutz, IMO. And their anniversary was in October. So what's the big darn rush when you're already late? Nope.
Lurkyloo--hang around. No need to run off.
Posted by: CountryGal | November 22, 2006 01:12 AM
It's way towards the end Vero.
Posted by: CountryGal | November 22, 2006 01:14 AM
Thanks, CG.
Posted by: vero | November 22, 2006 01:15 AM
Transcript with a T. LOL!
And the step-father being mis-quoted sounds BS to me as well. MOOOOOOOO!
Posted by: CountryGal | November 22, 2006 01:18 AM
Vero
That was posted about 2 hours ago on CTV.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 01:21 AM
Thanks, Canadian Girl.
Good night, all. Must to work in the morning!
Posted by: vero | November 22, 2006 01:24 AM
Listen to the one titled Bludgeoned to death. Interesting.
Posted by: CountryGal | November 22, 2006 01:35 AM
Good morning!
Fax, schmax. It was all just a rouse to get Meredith to the house to care for Cassidy. A lame one, too.
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 04:33 AM
Jason Young better beware. They didn't have anything physical evidence in Laci's murder. Scott was still sentenced to death.
1. Location
2. His behaviour
3. Phone calls
4. Scott himself
He can be as close-lipped as he likes. They can still nail him.
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 05:45 AM
That poster at CTV remains on a "Glorious Jason" campaign, that's all. Not buying it. It's the same ole, same ole post across the web. Hearsay all to JY's credit constantly casting subliminal messages towards Meredith. Nothing more or less, imo. The only fact is it based on is fear,IMOO.
Posted by: JustPassing | November 22, 2006 06:06 AM
Good morning backatcha Mgt. I agree with you 100% I expect a woman to emerge in all of this - the state and location is ireelevant. LE have said NOTHING more than very basic details. Ditto the media. Attempting to nail the media is not working this time. That's moot, boring, been there done that, not this time as much as they'd like it to be because there is no other reasonable explanations. Am with Loretta on this one. JMOO
Posted by: JustPassing | November 22, 2006 06:11 AM
Thanks JP. You'd think a man would be ouraged that someone had brutally murdered his wife. Wouldn't you?
JY is a sleazy coward, IMO
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 06:12 AM
And good morning backatcha, mgt. The 'new' post on CTV, nothing new- repeat debunk of JY's telling actions. Interesting how that same post manages to keep coming back. Desperate?
Anyone see the post on CTV about JY's alleged g/f in Florida? And a delivery vehicle saw JY's vehicle there against his testimony?
Soon as the parents/family say "He is a sweet, nice kid, known him all my life, would never do such a thing, they were totally in love, happy marriage, would never have an affair, etc" my eyes give a cold roll. What are they hiding? This guy PUT the eyes on him after he lawyered up, sahred no sorrow with MY's family then picked up Cassie and rode straight outta town. Normal? Not.
Suddenly his friends advised him to lawyer up? No they didn't. His step-father did. Furthermore they say media and LE are trying to pin this on JY. No they have not. Brainwashing, thasall!
LE and Media have said very little aside from it's not a random crime, blunt force trauma, JY called Meredith to collect a fax and asking for vehicles seen in area between midnight and 6 am. I am with most of you and Loretta on this one, 100%
Ray Carruth, Scott & Michael P, Bonnie Bakley, Justin Barber, Mark Hacking, Janet Abora... hundreds of cases ... and now ... Jason Young? Methinkso. This just too bad. MOO
Posted by: JustPassing | November 22, 2006 06:20 AM
Yes, you WOULD think that. Instead his actions slap LE and the family in the face with "I have a lawyer. Talk to him. I know nothing. This is about me and MY rights, not justice for Michelle and my unborn baby son." Showed NO warmth to MY's family at funeral. Just leaves a town hanging. If any attention is on him, then sorry - JASON YOUNG is solely responsibile for that. Basically many feel te following. Money and cashing in on future: (insurance, no divorce payout, keeps house and daughter, gets freedom) Sex (other women, I'll wager rumors are true) and oportunity (returned to do the deed). IMOO, of course!
Posted by: JustPassing | November 22, 2006 06:25 AM
Apologies for duplication or confusion of my double posts above. I thought I lost earlier post as I received 'network error', came back and it was not here.
Posted by: JustPassing | November 22, 2006 06:27 AM
JY having a girlfriend wouldn't surprise me at all. Even a boyfriend, wouldn't surprise me.
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 07:03 AM
Interesting that Sheriff Harrison said "fax," not "printout."
Not that it really matters, except that the JII (Jason is innocent) crowd seem to be so adamant that it was not. I have to wonder why.
Posted by: vero | November 22, 2006 08:06 AM
Well, Vero! A fax and a print-out are poles and poles apart, you know. One comes out of a printer and the other comes out of a printer. See what I mean?
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 08:12 AM
Hope you noticed the dripping sarcasm, Vero.
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 08:17 AM
Well, the fax remains that anything he wanted his SIL to look at in regards to a present for Michelle could have been sent via an email link to Meredith's own computer.
Posted by: vero | November 22, 2006 08:25 AM
Morning all. Just had a couple thoughts to share.
Re: Fax / Print out
My suspicion is that the sheriff isn't the person who took the actual statement from Merideth. She may very well have said print out. Like Mgt said both are peices of paper from a computer. Could just be a matter of symantics IMO. As for lawyering up, well as much as I hate to say it, I would do the same. There are so few actual facts in this case that we are aware of. If I am not mistaken the info that his Step father told him to get a lawyer as opposed to the info that it was his friends who suggested it after being questioned be LE.....is all hearsay, is it not?
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 08:27 AM
He shouldn't need a lawyer, CanadianGirl. If he has receipts and proof that he was where he was supposed to have been, LE would have already cleared him of suspicion.
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 08:33 AM
Probably.
Posted by: vero | November 22, 2006 08:33 AM
He must have at least needed to eat something on a long trip. CCTV footage could clear him. Anything!
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 08:34 AM
See, that's my take, also, Mgt. Why would he need a lawyer? Why not just cooperate? If innocent, he will be eliminated as a suspect very shortly. Hiring a lawyer to act as a go-between with LE seems to me to be the act of a guilty person.
Posted by: vero | November 22, 2006 08:36 AM
Mgt
Well I work in LE and I would have a lawyer, so I think he did the right thing there. I have faith in LE there that they will go over his alibi / timeline with a fine tooth comb reciepts and all.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 08:38 AM
Well then, working in LE you must have seen the difference between innocent behaviour and guilty behaviour on numerous occasions.
I rest my case!
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 08:41 AM
You have to keep in mind it takes time to get phone records and forensic test results too. They may be 85% sure he did it or 85% sure he didn't but they want to make sure they have all their ducks in a row before they act.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 08:41 AM
The only way that the printout would be totally different is if he had printed it out previously and had it stashed somewhere in the house and told Meredith where to find it.
That still doesn't explain why he's shopping for an October anniversary gift in November.
Posted by: Barbara | November 22, 2006 08:42 AM
Purest speculation here, but, what if he had no meeting and just told Michelle that to cover a trip for some other reason? It might be worthwhile for LE to look at more of his business trips. Didn't one of his friends say that he often took business trips? How often? To where? Maybe there are receipts available from those trips, as well.
Posted by: vero | November 22, 2006 08:43 AM
If Jason Young cannot produce the clothing he was wearing when he left on his trip, I'd lock him up on that alone.
Let us hope Michelle's friend was observant that night.
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 08:45 AM
I'm pretty sure that John Mason got a lawyer and he was completely innocent.
Posted by: Barbara | November 22, 2006 08:45 AM
Mgt
Oh yes 20 years in LE I have seen many things. From the outside looking in yes my hunch is he is the prime suspect here. However....most of what is being discussed isn't fact, it's opinion and hearsay. Very little has been released from LE. I guess I have just learned to focus on the facts. Nature of the beast. LOL
My opinion or my gut instinct is that he did it, but thats not based on facts, just hunches.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 08:47 AM
Barbara, John Mason did get a lawyer right away. He also only took an independent LDT and refused a LE LDT. But, the results of his independent LDT came back saying he was completely honest about not knowing anything about Jennifer's disappearance and his lawyer released the results to the public immediately.
Posted by: Monica` | November 22, 2006 08:50 AM
Barbara
That is something that sticks out to me as well. Anniversary present a month late? I would like to hear what the explanation for that is.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 08:52 AM
I'm sure John Mason did, Barbara. Just saying, it wouldn't be the first thing on my mind, if my wife and unborn baby were bludgeoned to death.
I would be driven by a need to help. I would also understand that LE needed to clear me and would have provided DNA samples long before a 10 day period.
But, that's just me. I know some people have been framed in the past. I know getting a lawyer is sensible. I also know he should be helping this investigation. And, he should be helping Michelle's parents.
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 08:53 AM
I guess that's why the idea of getting a lawyer isn't that much a sticking point with me.
I'm with Canadian Girl. I would love to know the actual facts and seperate them from the rumors, speculations and possible erroneous facts meant to take suspicion away from him. Were there really valuables missing? Were there reports of items missing that later turned out not to be missing? (ala Scott Peterson). It would also be great to see something in print from someone that was actually at the business meeting with him.
Posted by: Barbara | November 22, 2006 08:55 AM
Mgt.
Your right in the middle of a tragedy like this he may not have thought about getting a laywer, but it's my experience that concerned friends and family do think of things like that and offer their advice. If your the prime suspect in a crime you should have a lawyer IMO guilty or innocent.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 08:58 AM
I agree Barbara. The business meeting is the 'thing'. If there was a meeting, I want to know what his demeanour was like.
Was he just like he usually was or, was he too happy and 'Jack-the-lad' jovial.
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 09:00 AM
I just get angry at these cases and I'm probably sounding irrational.
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 09:03 AM
Personally, I don't read too much into an anniversary gift a month late. My husband and I don't exchange gifts at all.
Although a surprise gift sounds like they did exchange gifts, so why wouldn't it be on time?
The sister in law having to stop by the house to intercept a fax sounds stranger to me.
I wish more info was available. There's not much left to discuss without more facts.
Posted by: Abby | November 22, 2006 09:19 AM
Fax or printout ?
As stated many times by various posters, this "Fax" or "printout" is probably the single most damning thing that points to JY.
Lets say it in fact a "print out" and not a fax . The point is, Meredith and all of Michelle's close friends would have an e-mail account. It defies logic to think that he would ask anyone to enter his home to look at a "print out" of various purses. If he wanted Meredith's opinion, he would simply send a web link via e-mail so she could see the options in color on the screen.....Again, IMO, this is by far the biggest thing that does not add up.
================================================
After thinking more about this....If it is shown he stopped by a leather store (Coach outlet?) on his way to his mothers of Friday, he could have been ready to buy and needed another opinon at the last minute. He would then call Meredith and ask that she look at some examples he had printed out earier from a web site. if he was in a store at the time, he may not recall the actual web site he had used, so he asked her to go look at the "print out ".
or...if it was a fax....maybe the store did not a web site to look at and he faxed over some purse photos from a catalogue in the store ?
Posted by: RPD | November 22, 2006 10:02 AM
IMO -
I cannot find any Coach outlet in Western NC or in VA. Also, the items in outlet stores *very rarely* match the items online, they are usually last years or off season.
My only point is it must have been a regular store or online order he wanted to make.
I have no idea why seeing "Coach Outlet" repeatedly has annoyed me so much. LOL! Sorry to be snippy!!
Posted by: fourier | November 22, 2006 10:14 AM
Going 'all around the houses' to buy a gift that is either a month late or seven weeks early?
That doesn't make sense, RPD
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 10:15 AM
Actually, there is a "Coach outlet" in Blowing Rock NC. This is 114 miles from Brevard. It would be "on the way" if his Friday am appointment was in Roanoke VA.
Why would he drive to Roanoke Va Thursday night ? it is 170 miles from his home and takes 3 1/2 hours. A 9am appointment would have required him to leave Raleigh at the crack of dawn. Not knowing the trip location in VA, seems to make scense since Roanoke is in Western Va with a lot of medical facilities (sales call). This would also offer him the chance to "swing by" his parents in Brevard Friday pm.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 22, 2006 10:38 AM
The info on the Coach outlet in blowing Rock is my post...forgot to sign in
Posted by: RPD | November 22, 2006 10:39 AM
Whoever you are, thanks. I've been searching but couldn't find any outlets out west..
Posted by: fourier | November 22, 2006 10:40 AM
RPD
Thats a possibility too. This purse info came from "Just the Facts". In the sheriffs interview with GVS the only facts that were stated is that Merideth went to the house at Jasons request to retrieve a fax he did not want Michelle to see.
Most people seem to think JTF's posts are not facts so why believe the purse story?
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 10:41 AM
the point is we do not have any facts. However, I really think this poster does in fact know Jason well and I really think this info on the purse is coming from JY. Unless he is a total fraud with all his info, this is most likely what the inner circle is saying about the "fax".
That being said,The only other post I have seen that discusses this as described is from "ConcernedCitez" for CTV message. He/she could simply be quoting "Just the facts".
I will try to dig a bit today for more info locally. I have not been able to get my friend that is Michelle's sorority sister....
Posted by: Anonymous | November 22, 2006 10:53 AM
Good morning!
Boy, you guys have been busy this morning.
Off to catch up.
Posted by: Thumper | November 22, 2006 11:00 AM
RPD, Jason's friends must be asking "some" questions. It is only human nature.
Unless his lawyer has stopped him from talking to his friends.
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 11:01 AM
Boy, this thread is getting long. I have to put something new up. It probably won't be about this case, but feel free to discuss this case in the new thread. I don't have enough new info to really write anything about this case yet.
Posted by: loretta | November 22, 2006 11:08 AM
I am sure Roger Smith told him to be totally quiet during the investigation. If he was leaking info to his friends, that could come back and haunt him big time if there is ever a trial.That being said, I can't help but think he spoke to some close friends during the funeral, ect and some of this info has leaked. However, this info about the "purse" has only been posted by JUST THE FACTS, so we are left to wonder if it is all just made up.
Just the facts.....there seems to be a lot of doubt concerning your "inside info". Please give us some more insight as to where you are hearing your "facts" in this case....Thanks !
Posted by: Anonymous | November 22, 2006 11:08 AM
Thanks for all the input today.
To the hostess ~~respect~~
Ciao!
Posted by: Mgt | November 22, 2006 11:52 AM
http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/10381197/detail.html
Possible spousal murder theater?
Posted by: Lisa | November 22, 2006 03:43 PM
The CTV boards are nuts. Most, if not all of us stopped trying to post there two years ago.
Posted by: loretta | November 22, 2006 04:52 PM
There is a case from Metairie, Louisiana of Karen Plaisance who's body was found in the back seat of a vehicle inside Ochsner Foundation Hospital's parking garage. Her husband had reported her missing from Cutoff, LA about four weeks earlier.
It seems to me that if she were injured or ill, she would have gone directly to the emergency room at Ochsner, which has a parking area specifically for the emergency room. I also find it odd that her body was found in the back seat of the vehicle. That Someone drove her there is a possibility. So far, the husband is not even considered a person of interest.
Many people are still missing from Louisiana and Mississippi, and many became missing long after the hurricanes disrupted life here.
Posted by: Spellcaster | November 22, 2006 04:54 PM
My dog barks in the middle of the night sometimes (because he's nutz, not because there is any threat). I doubt that my neighbors hear him since he's an indoor dog. Hearing a dog bark or not hearing a dog bark doesn't really mean a whole lot to me.
Posted by: Barbara | November 22, 2006 05:02 PM
lurkyloo
Actually the post about the dogs a few weeks before as well as the friend who felt like they were being watched the night before the murder were posted here. I know because they were looking for the posts and I found them here and copied it for them.
Again though it is all hearsay not fact as far as I know anyway.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 05:02 PM
Depending on the type of dog they have, having a stranger come in and attack the owner of the home would be a red flag. As nutz as my dog is, I don't think he would stand by and let that happen. He would inflict some wounds at the very least. I would also expect the dog to have some beating damage if it was a stranger attack.
Posted by: Barbara | November 22, 2006 05:06 PM
My apologies for my off-topic post. I am very concerned that LE is so swamped in South LA that this case is being overlooked or not being given the attention that Karen Plaisance deserves.
Posted by: Spellcaster | November 22, 2006 05:11 PM
Barbara
I wonder the same thing. Do we know what kind of dog they have? Did it have the run of the house or was it in a kennel at night?
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 05:15 PM
It's not really off topic Spellcaster. I feel very badly for the people of Louisiana and in particular the New Orleans area. I'm afraid a whole lot of cases are not going to get solved there.
Posted by: Barbara | November 22, 2006 05:16 PM
I don't know Canadian Girl. I just know the part about them having a dog. That's one of those details that would be nice to know.
Posted by: Barbara | November 22, 2006 05:23 PM
LOL yes one of the hundreds of details we would like to know.
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 05:27 PM
Yes, the dog thing is suspicious, too. If the perp knew the dog, the dog would not go nuts when he entered, and the perp would know where to put the dog during the deed so the dog would be quiet.
How would the perp know Jason wasn't coming home? How would the perp know if they had a dog or not? Are we assuming that the perp staked out this house for this reason? Not likely.
Why?
Serial murders are generally ones of opportunity. No way a perp would know this walking into the house. It doesn't work that way.
There is no way a stranger would know Jason wasn't out for a beer run or a diaper run or something else and coming home any minute. No way the perp knows when the TV company is leaving. No way the perp knows what the dog will or will not do. No way the perp knows where the toddler is or when she goes to bed.
All those details would only be known by someone intimately acquainted with the family: a sister, babysitter, husband.
Posted by: loretta | November 22, 2006 05:30 PM
And the neighbors have been assured that they don't have to worry about some monster killer on the loose.
Posted by: Barbara | November 22, 2006 05:32 PM
The victimology here doesn't lend itself to a stranger slaying. She wasn't a high risk victim.
Posted by: CountryGal | November 22, 2006 05:33 PM
re: the dog
IIRC, the dog was in the slide show/memorial shown at the funeral.
I have read JY rescued it from the pound. It appeared to be a lab mix. maybe some pitbull?
I have a friend that left her back door open so the dogs could go in & out. She came home to find her back door closed & the dogs outside. Lots of stuff missing from inside. They are not friendly dogs! Cops told her told her that the perps were prolly watching & had been giving them food. Then one day made a break for the door while they got their scooby snack.
I am not endorsing any one theory. But I can see how someone could possibly overcome the dog obstacle. There is something seriously disturbing me abt this case (besides the senseless, sadistic violence). Can't put my finger on it though
Posted by: lurkyloo | November 22, 2006 05:35 PM
Not unless it is someone in the neighbourhood. My neighbours all know I have a rottweiller. Some even know when I am away on course as they see me puting my bags in the car. LOL Lots of busy bodies!
My gut says the husband did it. I guess my job reminds me never to rule anything out either though.
JMO
Posted by: CanadianGirl | November 22, 2006 05:40 PM
If there are too many coincidences, maybe they are not coincidences.
Posted by: Barbara | November 22, 2006 05:41 PM
CanadianGirl,
Do you know anything about the Lianna White case? Did that happen in Canada?
Posted by: Anonymous | November 22, 2006 05:42 PM
New entry:
Feel free to continue to discuss the Young case or others, where relevant.
Posted by: loretta | November 22, 2006 06:45 PM