Michelle Young - Dec. 1 thru 4 [Archive] - Page 2

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 07:43 PM

Exactly. And then he might have been in a position to file a counter suit to recover any monies if he did have to pay fees to defend himself (if innocnet). I don't see this lack of response being in the best interest of JY (if innocent). If Roger Smith really is still his lawyer, he should be fired. I sure wouldn't be hiring him if I were in a position to need a good lawyer. Of course if Jason is guilty, it was the only move to make. IMO

I agree. Of all the alternatives I considered, not filing a response at all wasn't one of them.

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 07:43 PM

What was that guy talking about in the video, about not knowing what kind of finances Jason has/whether he could afford it or whatever?

Lol, that guy was LF's lawyer , saying he did not know if Jason could afford to see this through.

Most of the time, and we all know this, a civil suit is more of a formality than anything else and much easier to win.

I don't think any of us expected Jason to win this, but we would have liked to have seen a response of some kind, even from his attorney.

Something,
Anything.

Again, anti~climatic.

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 07:44 PM

I'm sorry; I don't believe that.

And, you know that I do, and we respect each other's choices.

:)
Kat

alter ego

12-02-2008, 07:45 PM

Okay, I can understand that distinction. But what will be different when it's in the judge's hands? Is Jason going to respond then?

(2) By the Judge. –

a. In all other cases the party entitled to a judgment by default shall apply to the judge therefor; but no judgment by default shall be entered against an infant or incompetent person unless represented in the action by a guardian ad litem or other such representative who has appeared therein. If the party against whom judgment by default is sought has appeared in the action, that party (or, if appearing by representative, the representative) shall be served with written notice of the application for judgment at least three days prior to the hearing on such application. If, in order to enable the judge to enter judgment or to carry it into effect, it is necessary to take an account or to determine the amount of damages or to establish the truth of any averment by evidence or to take an investigation of any other matter, the judge may conduct such hearings or order such references as the judge deems necessary and proper and shall accord a right of trial by jury to the parties when and as required by the Constitution or by any statute of North Carolina. If the plaintiff seeks to establish paternity under Article 3 of Chapter 49 of the General Statutes and the defendant fails to appear, the judge shall enter judgment by default.

b. A motion for judgment by default may be decided by the court without a hearing if:

1. The motion specifically provides that the court will decide the motion for judgment by default without a hearing if the party against whom judgment is sought fails to serve a written response, stating the grounds for opposing the motion, within 30 days of service of the motion; and

2. The party against whom judgment is sought fails to serve the response in accordance with this sub‑subdivision.
Rule 55 (http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_1A/GS_1A-1,_Rule_55.html)

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 07:46 PM

I think he is upset because if it had dragged out say 18 months he would have made a pile of money. Wonder what part of the childs money he will get for just filing and going before the judge?

I never thought of that.

:beer:

Kat

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 07:50 PM

And, you know that I do, and we respect each other's choices.

:)
Kat

Yes, Kat, we do and I believe we will continue to. But I know what I read in those posts, and it's nothing beneficial to Jason IMO. Don't you find that odd?

alter ego

12-02-2008, 07:50 PM

alter ego

12-02-2008, 07:53 PM

Probably got expensive cleaning up after that H-U-G-E elephant in the living room...I seriously think that Jason has conditional custody of Cassidy. I think he only retains custody of her as long as he is living with either his mother or sister, don't think he can live with her ALONE. Just because we haven't seen any proof of Childrens Services having entered the picture, does not mean they haven't. When it became public knowledge that Cassidy was left alone with her murdered mothers body for hours on end they probably opened a case on her. Since the murder has not been resolved and Jason Young looks suspicious, being the sole focus of LE's investigation, I think he has to have "supervision" in the home with he and Cassidy. If CPS hasn't entered into this case and investigation something is amiss IMO,The burden of proof in revoking parental rights is very high. CPS would have no grounds to intervene in Jason's parental rights as he is not a threat to himself or to his daughter.

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 07:53 PM

(2) By the Judge. –

a. In all other cases the party entitled to a judgment by default shall apply to the judge therefor; but no judgment by default shall be entered against an infant or incompetent person unless represented in the action by a guardian ad litem or other such representative who has appeared therein. If the party against whom judgment by default is sought has appeared in the action, that party (or, if appearing by representative, the representative) shall be served with written notice of the application for judgment at least three days prior to the hearing on such application. If, in order to enable the judge to enter judgment or to carry it into effect, it is necessary to take an account or to determine the amount of damages or to establish the truth of any averment by evidence or to take an investigation of any other matter, the judge may conduct such hearings or order such references as the judge deems necessary and proper and shall accord a right of trial by jury to the parties when and as required by the Constitution or by any statute of North Carolina. If the plaintiff seeks to establish paternity under Article 3 of Chapter 49 of the General Statutes and the defendant fails to appear, the judge shall enter judgment by default.

b. A motion for judgment by default may be decided by the court without a hearing if:

1. The motion specifically provides that the court will decide the motion for judgment by default without a hearing if the party against whom judgment is sought fails to serve a written response, stating the grounds for opposing the motion, within 30 days of service of the motion; and

2. The party against whom judgment is sought fails to serve the response in accordance with this sub‑subdivision.
Rule 55 (http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/HTML/BySection/Chapter_1A/GS_1A-1,_Rule_55.html)

I read that, too, AE. But I'm not sure about the point you're making.

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 07:53 PM

Probably got expensive cleaning up after that H-U-G-E elephant in the living room...I seriously think that Jason has conditional custody of Cassidy. I think he only retains custody of her as long as he is living with either his mother or sister, don't think he can live with her ALONE. Just because we haven't seen any proof of Childrens Services having entered the picture, does not mean they haven't. When it became public knowledge that Cassidy was left alone with her murdered mothers body for hours on end they probably opened a case on her. Since the murder has not been resolved and Jason Young looks suspicious, being the sole focus of LE's investigation, I think he has to have "supervision" in the home with he and Cassidy. If CPS hasn't entered into this case and investigation something is amiss IMO,

It is only a rumor that Jason moved back with Heather, but she is his family.

But, why would CPS or anyone else take even the smallest chances with a child's life to let her continue to live with a "murderer"?

Kat

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 07:54 PM

Prolly the standard 33 1/3% contingency fee.

Most attorneys who do probate work have a standard representation agreement under which they bill at a stated rate for time involved.

alter ego

12-02-2008, 07:55 PM

Do you think Roger Smith so incompetent an attorney that he failed to file a response? If that's the case, Jason should definitely consider new representation. IMO
I dont' know if it was incompetence or a strategic move.

I'm rather baffled.

alter ego

12-02-2008, 07:55 PM

Most attorneys who do probate work have a standard representation agreement under which they bill at a stated rate for time involved.This isn't probate, it's a tort claim.

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 07:57 PM

I dont' know if it was incompetence or a strategic move.

I'm rather baffled.

So am I, honestly. Like I said, I never considered this. I thought, at the very least, he would file a denial.

I have a hard time believing this move, or lack thereof, is on Roger Smith's advice.

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 07:57 PM

Yes, Kat, we do and I believe we will continue to. But I know what I read in those posts, and it's nothing beneficial to Jason IMO. Don't you find that odd?

Maybe I am able to understand some of the reasons behind the messages.
He has told me nothing but the truth.

Kat

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 07:58 PM

This isn't probate, it's a tort claim.

Fine, but we don't know that Linda's attorneys aren't billing based on time involved rather than a contingency fee.

Barbara2

12-02-2008, 07:59 PM

Maybe I am able to understand some of the reasons behind the messages.
He has told me nothing but the truth.

Kat

You are assuming it has all been the truth. There is still that possibility that it has not been. IMO

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 07:59 PM

Maybe I am able to understand some of the reasons behind the messages.
He has told me nothing but the truth.

Kat

Of course we can, Kat. We'll agree to disagree. :)

alter ego

12-02-2008, 08:00 PM

It is only a rumor that Jason moved back with Heather, but she is his family.

But, why would CPS or anyone else take even the smallest chances with a child's life to let her continue to live with a "murderer"?

Kat
If he was living at Heather's when his summons was served at his mom's house then he technically was never served and Linda's pleading is null and void.

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 08:00 PM

So am I, honestly. Like I said, I never considered this. I thought, at the very least, he would file a denial.

I have a hard time believing this move, or lack thereof, is on Roger Smith's advice.

So, are you thinking, that it is only a matter of time, until the next s/w is released, and that will seal his fate anyway?

So, what would be the good of fighting this?

Is he just waiting it out?

Kat

jerry50

12-02-2008, 08:00 PM

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 08:01 PM

If he was living at Heather's when his summons was served at his mom's house then he technically was never served and Linda's pleading is null and void.

Interesting, so, that could be the reason he did not respond then?

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 08:02 PM

You STILL think he was speaking for Jason? :tongue:

Yep.

Kat

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 08:03 PM

So, are you thinking, that it is only a matter of time, until the next s/w is released, and that will seal his fate anyway?

So, what would be the good of fighting this?

Is he just waiting it out?

Kat

That's one thought I have. Another thought is that the LI company wasn't going to pay him anyway, so he figured he had nothing to lose. And still another thought is that Jason thought if he ignored it, it would just go away.

I don't know.

Barbara2

12-02-2008, 08:03 PM

If he was living at Heather's when his summons was served at his mom's house then he technically was never served and Linda's pleading is null and void.

I believe there is documentation to show that that is not the case. We'll just leave it at that. IMO

jerry50

12-02-2008, 08:03 PM

If he was living at Heather's when his summons was served at his mom's house then he technically was never served and Linda's pleading is null and void.

I thought he was in Puerto Rico enjoying his second anniversary.

If a person is trying to avoid being served with a legal document by moving around wouldn't serving it to his mother at his last known residence? What address do you suppose is on his driver's license?

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 08:04 PM

If he was living at Heather's when his summons was served at his mom's house then he technically was never served and Linda's pleading is null and void.

Then why didn't Roger Smith move for dismissal? Do you think he would have overlooked that?

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 08:05 PM

You are assuming it has all been the truth. There is still that possibility that it has not been. IMO

And, there is still the possibility that it is..

I believe him, he has had many many chances to lie for Jason, or make up stories or excuses.

He has resorted to none of them.

But, I am not asking you to believe him just because I do.

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 08:06 PM

Well, not the first time you've been wrong. Probably not the last. ;)

I am sure, and I never have any trouble admitting to it.

:)
Kat

Wyn

12-02-2008, 08:07 PM

I believe there is documentation to show that that is not the case. We'll just leave it at that. IMO

There's a move that won't fly if that's the reason he didn't respond to the suit. I feel sorry for Roger Smith. He may represent him but he can't force a client to do anything.

on the go

12-02-2008, 08:07 PM

If he was living at Heather's when his summons was served at his mom's house then he technically was never served and Linda's pleading is null and void.

If it was served at his mom's house, she would have been a person of suitable age and discretion.

If his attorney thought service was defective, he would have moved to have it dismissed.

alter ego

12-02-2008, 08:07 PM

I read that, too, AE. But I'm not sure about the point you're making.You asked what would be different in a judge's hands. He can hold a trial to determine if the allegations are true before making a default judgement.

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 08:10 PM

You asked what would be different in a judge's hands. He can hold a trial to determine if the allegations are true before making a default judgement.

Linda's suit requested a jury trial, so that may well happen. But if Jason/his attorney fails to present a defense - as they failed to file a response - what do you think the outcome will be? It only requires a preponderance of the evidence.

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 08:10 PM

Wyn

12-02-2008, 08:11 PM

My favorite quote:

"And this way he doesn't run the risk of being interviewed under oath."

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=6534474

Guess it's better to be thought a murderer and lose your assets to your daughter than to be interviewed and remove all doubt.

alter ego

12-02-2008, 08:11 PM

If it was served at his mom's house, she would have been a person of suitable age and discretion.

If his attorney thought service was defective, he would have moved to have it dismissed.The service has to be at the defendant's dwelling. If he was not served, it's kinda hard for his atty to claim the service was defective when technically, he knew nothing about it.

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 08:13 PM

You asked what would be different in a judge's hands. He can hold a trial to determine if the allegations are true before making a default judgement.

Okay, so let's bottom line this thing out.

This Judge has to determine that Jason killed Michelle, and in doing so, L F is awarded the damages from this suit.

Right?

Okay, so then what?

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 08:16 PM

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 08:17 PM

It says that some experts think Young is taking a calculated gamble.

Kat

Oh, he's definitely doing that. My question is, why?

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 08:18 PM

Thats what I figured it would be. A big chung of change the child will never see.

Has the child seen any of it to date? It could be argued that something is better than nothing.

JMO

on the go

12-02-2008, 08:18 PM

The service has to be at the defendant's dwelling. If he was not served, it's kinda hard for his atty to claim the service was defective when technically, he knew nothing about it.

If he was living with his mother and his mother was served, she's a person of suitable age and discretion -- i.e., she's old enough and wise enough to give the complaint to Jason.

alter ego

12-02-2008, 08:20 PM

I thought he was in Puerto Rico enjoying his second anniversary.

If a person is trying to avoid being served with a legal document by moving around wouldn't serving it to his mother at his last known residence? What address do you suppose is on his driver's license?
Linda's complaint was sealed so he wouldn't be able to avoid service. I have no idea what his driver's license shows, nor do I care.

I'm not going out on a limb and give Jason any special powers to see what others are thinking about doing so that he can take evasive maneuvers.

He lived with Heather before, did he not? NC Statute says he has to be served at his dwelling or usual place of abode. So he could successfully argue that the court lacks personal jurisdiction since he was not served at his 'usual place of abode'.

alter ego

12-02-2008, 08:21 PM

If he was living with his mother and his mother was served, she's a person of suitable age and discretion -- i.e., she's old enough and wise enough to give the complaint to Jason.That's IF he was living with his mom at the time of the service.

Wyn

12-02-2008, 08:22 PM

Thats what I figured it would be. A big chung of change the child will never see.

Or sixty-six percent that SHE will get, that she wouldn't if Mrs. Fisher hadn't filed the lawsuit. ;) Now daddy can't spend her money to go on all those vacations and his annual trip to Puerto Rico.

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 08:22 PM

If he was living with his mother and his mother was served, she's a person of suitable age and discretion -- i.e., she's old enough and wise enough to give the complaint to Jason.

Actually, the law says "dwelling house or usual place of abode". "Usual place of abode" leaves room for interpretation, imo. I don't think Jason can contest this based on faulty service. And if he could, why didn't he?

http://www.ncleg.net/EnactedLegislation/Statutes/PDF/BySection/Chapter_1A/GS_1A-1,_Rule_4.pdf

on the go

12-02-2008, 08:23 PM

Linda's complaint was sealed so he wouldn't be able to avoid service. I have no idea what his driver's license shows, nor do I care.

I'm not going out on a limb and give Jason any special powers to see what others are thinking about doing so that he can take evasive maneuvers.

He lived with Heather before, did he not? NC Statute says he has to be served at his dwelling or usual place of abode. So he could successfully argue that the court lacks personal jurisdiction since he was not served at his 'usual place of abode'.

But there is no argument.

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 08:23 PM

Oh, he's definitely doing that. My question is, why?

It also says he can contest the decision after it is made.

I don't know why, I don't think any of us were expecting this,
my money was on an extension.

But, they still need more evidence to convict him,or these suits would have not been filed out of order.

Kat

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 08:26 PM

It also says he can contest the decision after it is made.

I don't know why, I don't think any of us were expecting this,
my money was on an extension.

But, they still need more evidence to convict him,or these suits would have not been filed out of order.

Kat

The thing is, Kat, there is no order, and the burden of proof in a civil case is significantly lower than in a criminal case. Yes, he can contest it. But why didn't he do so now?

alter ego

12-02-2008, 08:31 PM

Okay, so let's bottom line this thing out.

This Judge has to determine that Jason killed Michelle, and in doing so, L F is awarded the damages from this suit.

Right?

Okay, so then what?

KatWell, the judge will also have to determine the amt of damages due, which will include Jason's earnings and net worth and also the wages that Michelle would have earned until Cassidy turned 18 (or whatever the age of majority is in NC).

So there would be a hearing first to determine if the allegations in Linda's complaint are backed by facts. If the judge rules in her favor, then he would go over the $$$ and include the amt due from Jason in the default judgement. If Linda gets rulings in her favor, then Jason would be served with the judgement and ordered to pay X amt of $$$.

And both sides can appeal if the judge does not rule in their favor.

alter ego

12-02-2008, 08:32 PM

But there is no argument.Not at this time. There may be at a later date.

alter ego

12-02-2008, 08:34 PM

I believe there is documentation to show that that is not the case. We'll just leave it at that. IMO
You believe so, huh.

You feel free to leave it at that. I'll speak for myself and continue to explore the possibility, TYVM.

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 08:41 PM

Not at this time. There may be at a later date.

AE, why would he wait? What do you think the strategy is in that?

alter ego

12-02-2008, 08:43 PM

AE, why would he wait? What do you think the strategy is in that?Force their hand and make them show the judge their evidence to support their pleading for the default judgement.

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 08:47 PM

Force their hand and make them show the judge their evidence to support their pleading for the default judgement.

Maybe. But honestly, I think it's far more likely that Jason and his attorney will have the evidence provided to them under the criminal discovery laws.

alter ego

12-02-2008, 08:52 PM

Maybe. But honestly, I think it's far more likely that Jason and his attorney will have the evidence provided to them under the criminal discovery laws.
It's not about discovery.

It's about the judge "establish[ing] the truth of any averment by evidence or to take an investigation of any other matter" per the statute I posted earlier.

IOW, and as MerryMent pointed out earlier, Linda has to prove the allegations in her complaint to get a default judgement.

Leanne Weich

12-02-2008, 08:54 PM

Thanks Kat. I wonder if LF could've also asked for custody of the child in that suit?

I haven't read further than this anna so if this is redundant, I'm sorry. I know here you couldn't file both claims in one action. Custody would have to be addressed in Family Court.

Cardinal

12-02-2008, 08:56 PM

It's not about discovery.

It's about the judge "establish[ing] the truth of any averment by evidence or to take an investigation of any other matter" per the statute I posted earlier.

I understand that, AE. I also understand that, by your own theory, Jason is playing a game with the legal system rather than respond affirmatively in his own defense. Rather sad, don't you think?

Goodnight :seeya:

Leanne Weich

12-02-2008, 09:04 PM

No response to something that has no merit. Brilliant strategy on the part of Jason's attorney. I applaud it.

What strategy? Any attorney who allows a default judgment to be entered against his client as a strategy needs to be disbarred imo. There is absolutely no guarantee a judge will set aside the judgment and, in the event JY is arrested prior to such an application being filed and heard, there is every chance of the matter being postponed until the criminal trial is finalized. If JY were to be found guilty at a criminal trial, it all becomes moot, imo. I guess this brilliant strategy comes from the same place that the Application to Dismiss the WDS came from.

alter ego

12-02-2008, 09:07 PM

I understand that, AE. I also understand that, by your own theory, Jason is playing a game with the legal system rather than respond affirmatively in his own defense. Rather sad, don't you think?

Goodnight :seeya:He's not playing a game anymore than Linda is.

Not sure why he would respond with an affirmative defense.

This whole case is sad.

Have a great night, Card. :seeya:

Leanne Weich

12-02-2008, 09:10 PM

I think a default judgment is what Linda got today.

Card, you're right. A good day for Linda - a very good day.

jerry50

12-02-2008, 09:16 PM

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 09:26 PM

Force their hand and make them show the judge their evidence to support their pleading for the default judgement.

Bingo.....

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 09:32 PM

The thing is, Kat, there is no order, and the burden of proof in a civil case is significantly lower than in a criminal case. Yes, he can contest it. But why didn't he do so now?

Why should he? A lawyer confident in his client's innocence is going to do exactly as Jason's lawyer has done. In a wrongful death lawsuit, the plaintiff must prove the defendant is responsible for the death.

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 09:39 PM

What strategy? Any attorney who allows a default judgment to be entered against his client as a strategy needs to be disbarred imo. There is absolutely no guarantee a judge will set aside the judgment and, in the event JY is arrested prior to such an application being filed and heard, there is every chance of the matter being postponed until the criminal trial is finalized. If JY were to be found guilty at a criminal trial, it all becomes moot, imo. I guess this brilliant strategy comes from the same place that the Application to Dismiss the WDS came from.

The brilliant strategy comes from a fairly accomplished attorney. He knows a judge will not enter a default judgment without adequate proof Jason is responsible for Michelle's death.

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 09:44 PM

I understand that, AE. I also understand that, by your own theory, Jason is playing a game with the legal system rather than respond affirmatively in his own defense. Rather sad, don't you think?

Goodnight :seeya:

Fisher ignoring the wishes of Michelle's Will in order to file this lawsuit is nothing more than an attempt to game the legal system.

annalyzer

12-02-2008, 09:44 PM

Well I for one am glad there is something new in this case, some moving and shaking, and that is thanks to Linda Fisher.

So what happens next? I think someone told me before but I'm so tired I don't remember their answer.

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 09:45 PM

How could he prove he didn't do something? Its up to them to prove he did. I have been seeing again today were he was shown leaving the motel.. Well that just isn't true. There is no proof JY ever left that motel. I haven't seen any.

Right. The burden of proof is totally on Fisher, the plaintiff.

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 09:49 PM

Card, you're right. A good day for Linda - a very good day.

Linda did not receive a default judgment today. I doubt her attorneys consider today to be a very good day.

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 09:55 PM

I find it sad that anyone would call it a good day for a mother that lost a child. Just because she may get a bunch of money.

Exactly, and once again nothing will bring Michelle back, so I don't see how anyone wins.

In fact, in the statement issued today from LF's lawyers, he calls this a lose-lose situation.

It will not be as easy for LF to prove her case against Jason, when L E themselves can not even do it.

Kat

Wyn

12-02-2008, 09:55 PM

Fisher ignoring the wishes of Michelle's Will in order to file this lawsuit is nothing more than an attempt to game the legal system.

When Michelle made out her will she didn't expect the beneficiary to be her murderer. She'd probably be happy that her wishes were being ignored and that her family is doing what they can to seek justice. After all, which is better, that her murderer benefit from her death, or that Cassidy benefit and that the assets are out of Jason's reach so he can't continue the lifestyle he has enjoyed in the past year? Guess he'll need to save his pennies for attorney fees now, no more trips to Puerto Rico, or Montana.

"game the legal system"? :shrug:

Mrs. Fisher is doing the only thing she can at this point.

Kat4Eagles

12-02-2008, 09:57 PM

Linda did not receive a default judgment today. I doubt her attorneys consider today to be a very good day.

Nope, I just posted the same thing , if you play the videos.

When lawyers use the term lose~lose situation to describe the day's events, then what does that tell you?

Kat

Leanne Weich

12-02-2008, 10:01 PM

I find it sad that anyone would call it a good day for a mother that lost a child. Just because she may get a bunch of money.

It's a good day for Linda because she has made the first step toward holding Jason's feet to the fire for the murder of her daughter. She's not going to get a bunch of money. She clearly states that all money is to be for Cassidy. Not everyone's motives are money. Linda would be a crappy grandmother if she didn't ensure that Cassidy is made provision for as Michelle would have wanted.

Wyn

12-02-2008, 10:08 PM

It's a good day for Linda because she has made the first step toward holding Jason's feet to the fire for the murder of her daughter. She's not going to get a bunch of money. She clearly states that all money is to be for Cassidy. Not everyone's motives are money. Linda would be a crappy grandmother if she didn't ensure that Cassidy is made provision for as Michelle would have wanted.

Exactly, it is a good day. It may be a small step, but it is a step towards JUSTICE and that's what counts. Why anyone would fault Mrs. Fisher for trying to make sure CASSIDY'S money is safe from Jason, is beyond me. :confused:

JHP

12-02-2008, 10:09 PM

Nope, I just posted the same thing , if you play the videos.

When lawyers use the term lose~lose situation to describe the day's events, then what does that tell you?

Kat

Kat, I understood the attorney to be saying Jason was in a lose-lose situation. Linda Fishers attorney looked pretty confident to me. I don't know about Mr. Smith, cause we didn't see him.

JMO

Leanne Weich

12-02-2008, 10:10 PM

Linda did not receive a default judgment today. I doubt her attorneys consider today to be a very good day.

If you go back on this thread, you'll find the entry of the default judgment as follows:

"Entry of default judgment is hereby made and entered against the Defendant, Jason Lynn Young as provided by Rule 55(a) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure. This the 2nd day of December 2008"

It is on my page 9 but I guess if your page is set up differently than mine it would vary.

Leanne Weich

12-02-2008, 10:12 PM

Exactly, and once again nothing will bring Michelle back, so I don't see how anyone wins.

In fact, in the statement issued today from LF's lawyers, he calls this a lose-lose situation.

It will not be as easy for LF to prove her case against Jason, when L E themselves can not even do it.

Kat

Really! Clarke and Darden couldn't prove OJ killed Nicole and Ron yet he was found to be their slayer.

Lindsey

12-02-2008, 10:15 PM

If you go back on this thread, you'll find the entry of the default judgment as follows:

"Entry of default judgment is hereby made and entered against the Defendant, Jason Lynn Young as provided by Rule 55(a) of the North Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure. This the 2nd day of December 2008"

It is on my page 9 but I guess if your page is set up differently than mine it would vary.

Apparently it's not a done deal yet.

A judge will be asked to rule on the two issues in the coming weeks. If Jason Young is declared his wife's killer, under law, he would not be allowed to collect insurance benefits.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/4061834/

Leanne Weich

12-02-2008, 10:17 PM

Nope, I just posted the same thing , if you play the videos.

When lawyers use the term lose~lose situation to describe the day's events, then what does that tell you?

Kat

Of course it's a lose - lose situation. Linda's daughter is dead and JLY has confirmed to her he's the cause of her loss and JLY loses whether it be his right to Michelle's assets or his "good name" and future prospects. He will be known as a killer, with or without a criminal trial. There are no real winners in this case besides a moral victory for Linda in seeing that the scourge who killed her daughter does not benefit from her death financially.

Leanne Weich

12-02-2008, 10:22 PM

Apparently it's not a done deal yet.

A judge will be asked to rule on the two issues in the coming weeks. If Jason Young is declared his wife's killer, under law, he would not be allowed to collect insurance benefits.

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/4061834/

That's a mere formality, imo. Jason, by failing to file a response to the WDS has admitted Linda's claims are true. It will be a big ask to now be able to deny it unless his attorney claims he stuffed up and missed the filing date through no fault of Jasons, imo. I think the only decision which has to be made now is the $ amount to be awarded to Linda for and on behalf of Cassidy.

Leanne Weich

12-02-2008, 10:25 PM

Can you believe what some of these people post :lol:

After following this case for over 2 years, it wouldn't surprise me if one of the posters here suddenly claimed to be JY's alibi for the night of the murder.

Wyn

12-02-2008, 10:27 PM

After following this case for over 2 years, it wouldn't surprise me if one of the posters here suddenly claimed to be JY's alibi for the night of the murder.

:biggrin:

They'd better have receipts.

JHP

12-02-2008, 10:35 PM

After following this case for over 2 years, it wouldn't surprise me if one of the posters here suddenly claimed to be JY's alibi for the night of the murder.

:biggrin:OMG I hadn't thought about that. Neither have they, I can see it coming in a few days now.

JMO

cognac

12-02-2008, 11:03 PM

I will give the benefit of the doubt to Linda's lawyers. They would have known where JY was living at the time so that the papers would be served legally.

So did the process server, apparently. S/he filed an affidavit saying that a copy of the summons and complaint was delivered to Pat Young at Mockingbird, her residence and Jason L Young's residence.

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 11:18 PM

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 11:19 PM

Really! Clarke and Darden couldn't prove OJ killed Nicole and Ron yet he was found to be their slayer.

Yes, in civil court AFTER OJ's trial. Because it was after the trial, evidence used at his trial was available to the plaintiff.

cognac

12-02-2008, 11:26 PM

Linda did not receive a default judgment today. I doubt her attorneys consider today to be a very good day.

Yes she did and now it will go before a Judge for damages to be assessed.

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 11:27 PM

That's a mere formality, imo. Jason, by failing to file a response to the WDS has admitted Linda's claims are true. It will be a big ask to now be able to deny it unless his attorney claims he stuffed up and missed the filing date through no fault of Jasons, imo. I think the only decision which has to be made now is the $ amount to be awarded to Linda for and on behalf of Cassidy.

Jason didn't respond. His silence is not an admission of guilt of a crime. You really are delusional if you think a judge will rule Jason a "slayer" without solid proof Jason is responsible for Michelle's death.

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 11:32 PM

Can you believe what some of these people post :lol:

Kinda like you posted yesterday that the DA had filed a motion to continue the seal on the warrant until Dec. 19....:lol:

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 11:43 PM

You're delusional if you think a judge won't consider his failure to respond as an admission of guilt. Jason is afraid to respond because he might have to testify under oath and remove all doubt (not that I have any). A judge will look at all evidence but it's not looking too good for Jason. Guess he figured it would be easier to let Mrs. Fisher take what he has for Cassidy's benefit, not be subject to a deposition, and sit back and wait for the second shoe to drop.

Everyone seems so worried about Jason's attorney fees. If he's broke and he doesn't want to bankrupt his family, he could declare himself indigent and let the state provide an attorney for him. A lot of people go that route when they're poor.

Jason's attorney doesn't seem too worried about the outcome. My bet is that he is far more knowledgeable about it than you are.

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 11:44 PM

And that was what I was told by the SW clerk, Ms Bobbitt.
Why are you making fun of her mistake :shrug:

sure, sure. She told you. Riiiiiight. ;);)

MerriMent

12-02-2008, 11:49 PM

I think the JII's are getting desperate........looking for anything at this point.

Its obvious he murdered Michelle.

Even they know it.

The only things that are obvious: the DA hasn't indicted and Jason's attorney has pointedly ignored this lawsuit. The NERVE of those two! :lol::lol:

Wyn

12-02-2008, 11:58 PM

Jason is not paying an attorney. He is on his own.

That might explain his "no comment" comment. :eek:

cognac

12-03-2008, 12:07 AM

Jason is not paying an attorney. He is on his own.

Right! and when have you ever heard of an attorney ignoring a lawsuit!

Lindsey

12-03-2008, 12:11 AM

Jason is not paying an attorney. He is on his own.

Are you saying Roger Smith Jr. is no longer Jason's attorney? Amanda Lamb referred to him at least twice today as Jason's attorney. Guess she's out of the loop on this too? :confused: Or did I misunderstand your post?

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 12:16 AM

Are you saying Roger Smith Jr. is no longer Jason's attorney? Amanda Lamb referred to him at least twice today as Jason's attorney. Guess she's out of the loop on this too? :confused: Or did I misunderstand your post?

Of course, RS is still Jason's lawyer.

Let them play.

:rolleyes:

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 12:22 AM

Really! Clarke and Darden couldn't prove OJ killed Nicole and Ron yet he was found to be their slayer.

Why make this so easy?

OJ was found guilty, after the murder trial that Marcia and Chris messed up, and after the Bruno Magli's were found that matched
the shoeprints left at the scene.
:shrug:

Kat

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 12:28 AM

Jason is not paying an attorney. He is on his own.

Wrong again. At least you're consistent. Whenever you make a mistake, you always blame someone else.

Lindsey

12-03-2008, 12:36 AM

Like Amanda, do ya ?
Little roger is his criminal attorney.
You know the flat charge for the investigation if it takes 3 months or 2 years .

I would think Mr Smith could handle the civil suit also.

As far as I know Amanda has done most of the reporting on Michelle's murder and interviewed Linda a few times. I just thought she would know this stuff.

JMO

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 12:37 AM

The only things that are obvious: the DA hasn't indicted and Jason's attorney has pointedly ignored this lawsuit. The NERVE of those two! :lol::lol:

You are good !!

:beer:

Kat

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 12:38 AM

That was not true either?,
So that goes into the same "uncredible file" along with all the other stuff .
Wow.
Kat

Very uncredible. Ms. Bobbitt is being blamed for things that I doubt she ever said.

Another poster yesterday quoted Ms. Lamb who claimed Ms. Bobbitt told her there were no sealed warrants in this case. Go figure:shrug:

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 12:41 AM

I would think Mr Smith could handle the civil suit also.

As far as I know Amanda has done most of the reporting on Michelle's murder and interviewed Linda a few times. I just thought she would know this stuff.

JMO

You would think so, right?

Kat

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 12:43 AM

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 12:50 AM

I think the JII's are getting desperate........looking for anything at this point.

Its obvious he murdered Michelle.

Even they know it.

So, if it so obvious, to everyone, LE and LF, and they can't indict or convict, can someone explain the need to go after money more than a child's safety?

Thanxxx, Tiaz.

Kat

bookie

12-03-2008, 12:51 AM

Stop misleading Kat. You know what happened. You read all day at Friction Powered. Ms. Bobbitt made an error and admitted it. Kat hangs on your every word, at least make it the truth.

When did "Ms Bobbit" post an error and admit anything on this board? She didn't. That is the only truth about the whole Bobbit saga.

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 12:53 AM

Stop misleading Kat. You know what happened. You read all day at Friction Powered. Ms. Bobbitt made an error and admitted it. Kat hangs on your every word, at least make it the truth.

I've seen no link there or here to Ms. Bobbitt, herself, making comments or admitting any error. Until I see such a link, I consider these claims a lie. :no:

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 12:55 AM

Glad to hear you have an attorney
Hope they specialize in libel / slander defense :)

Indeed, he does. My specialty as well.:cool:

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 12:56 AM

So, if it so obvious, to everyone, LE and LF, and they can't indict or convict, can someone explain the need to go after money more than a child's safety?

Thanxxx, Tiaz.

Kat

One word explanation: greed

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 12:57 AM

You calling me and/or ms Bobbitt liars :no:

To my knowledge, Ms. Bobbitt hasn't spoken.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 12:58 AM

When did "Ms Bobbit" post an error and admit anything on this board? She didn't. That is the only truth about the whole Bobbit saga.

She didn't, and it is easy to blame someone who can not defend herself.
That is also not fair to her.
I asked for a link yesterday but never got one,

Maybe CW can weigh in on this.
Using someone's name in a public position on a Message Board without their permission
and saying they made a mistake giving out info?

This person should at least have a chance to refute the charges against her.

Kat

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 01:01 AM

When did "Ms Bobbit" post an error and admit anything on this board? She didn't. That is the only truth about the whole Bobbit saga.

yes, those of us who actually :read: know the truth.

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 01:04 AM

She didn't, and it is easy to blame someone who can not defend herself.
That is also not fair to her.
I asked for a link yesterday but never got one,

Maybe CW can weigh on in this.
Using someone's name in a public position on a Message Board without their permission?

Kat

It's quite unfair but it's also typical. When busted, some rather lie about it than admit they were wrong.

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 01:08 AM

Greed because she wants to see cassidy get 100% of Michelle's life insurance ? Pathetic :rolleyes:

Greed because she wants CONTROL of money that doesn't belong to her, imo.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:12 AM

Greed because she wants CONTROL of money that doesn't belong to her, imo.

I will never understand why she didn't at least go to the court for help with even supervised visits to see her g/d.

Sad.

:(

Kat

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 01:14 AM

Maybe CW can weigh in on this.

There is a poster here that was sternly told by the moderator to totally ignore me, yet she continues to taunt and bait me for some reason.
I am beginning to think this poster is soooo obsessed with me, she may eventually do something desperate.:shrug:

Use ignore if comments made to others bother you so much. Sheesh

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 01:16 AM

I will never understand why she didn't at least go to the court for help with even supervised visits to see her g/d.

Sad.

:(

Kat

Visits with her granddaughter were never her priority; control of the g'daughters money is the priority, imo.

jerry50

12-03-2008, 01:18 AM

I will never understand why she didn't at least go to the court for help with even supervised visits to see her g/d.

Sad.

:(

Kat

How do we know that she hasn't? Not every suit or petition is made public.

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 01:19 AM

How do we know that she hasn't? Not every suit or petition is made public.

yes it is. Our justice system is built on transparency.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:20 AM

How do we know that she hasn't? Not every suit or petition is made public.

I hope that is the case then.

My biggest concern is still C, all the money and lawsuits in the world will not bring back Michelle.

Hollow victories do not ease the pain of losing a loved one.

Kat

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 01:25 AM

Jason didn't respond. His silence is not an admission of guilt of a crime. You really are delusional if you think a judge will rule Jason a "slayer" without solid proof Jason is responsible for Michelle's death.

I don't think I'm the delusional one. What happened to the Motion to Dismiss which the judge would grant because Linda had no proof? The judge will take into account that Jason did not even attempt to deny Linda's claims - not much more proof needed in a civil case. It is mo that all that will really come out before the Judge is the $ amount of the judgment against the slayer.

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 01:31 AM

And that was what I was told by the SW clerk, Ms Bobbitt.
Why are you making fun of her mistake :shrug:

Don't fret Bud. You and Mrs B are not the only ones to make mistakes occasionally. Hell, AL said there was not a sealed SW. In fact, to go one step further, look at how many people who post here have been consistently wrong for over 2 years now yet they love to try to discredit you when, if you aggregate all the info. you've brought to the board, your errors have been miniscule. You are a great advocate for justice for Michelle and someone I'd like to have on my side if I were ever, God forbid, in Linda's shoes.

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 01:35 AM

I don't think I'm the delusional one. What happened to the Motion to Dismiss which the judge would grant because Linda had no proof? The judge will take into account that Jason did not even attempt to deny Linda's claims - not much more proof needed in a civil case. It is mo that all that will really come out before the Judge is the $ amount of the judgment against the slayer.

I think Jason's attorney wants to see this "evidence" Linda's attorneys claim to have. Alter Ego posted the link to civil procedure earlier. There is proof required to obtain damages in a default judgment. Fisher must prove that Jason is 100% responsible for Michelle's death.

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 01:38 AM

She didn't, and it is easy to blame someone who can not defend herself.
That is also not fair to her.
I asked for a link yesterday but never got one,

Maybe CW can weigh in on this.
Using someone's name in a public position on a Message Board without their permission
and saying they made a mistake giving out info?

This person should at least have a chance to refute the charges against her.

Kat

FGS Kat, grow up. Are you trying to get CW to close down this thread now that news is coming out. Can't you just stop the sparring and let events unfold.

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 01:39 AM

Don't fret Bud. You and Mrs B are not the only ones to make mistakes occasionally. Hell, AL said there was not a sealed SW. In fact, to go one step further, look at how many people who post here have been consistently wrong for over 2 years now yet they love to try to discredit you when, if you aggregate all the info. you've brought to the board, your errors have been miniscule. You are a great advocate for justice for Michelle and someone I'd like to have on my side if I were ever, God forbid, in Linda's shoes.

The irony is that the "mistakes" and "misinformation" posted here over the past two years haven't been the work of those of us who believe Jason is innocent.

Wyn

12-03-2008, 08:19 AM

Of course Smith is at least the architect of the over-all strategy. His lack of response seems to have rattled the opposing counsel.

Actually they seemed bemused, not rattled. Guess "rattled" is just wishful thinking on your part. I saw an interview and it didn't look like Mr. Michaels was "rattled" at all. I think they're also "surprised" that Jason didn't bother to respond to the WD Suit and is making this so easy for them. Of course we all know why, Jason can't take a chance and actually sit down for a deposition. That would be the final nail in his coffin.

Wyn

12-03-2008, 08:30 AM

Greed because she wants CONTROL of money that doesn't belong to her, imo.

Looks like you're still a little confused about the WD Suit. Why do you begrudge Cassidy the money from her mother's estate? Mrs. Fisher is doing the only LEGAL thing she can at this point and you're quite aware of that, but it makes for better posts if you overlook that fact, doesn't it? "GREED" seems to be a word that is very familiar to Jason's supporters. What could have affected so many posters that would be so concerned about money and not really care about the real truth in the WD Suit?

Barbara2

12-03-2008, 09:24 AM

Another article concerning Jason's lack of response:

http://www.ncwanted.com/unsolved/story/4065502/

Wyn

12-03-2008, 09:27 AM

Another article concerning Jason's lack of response:

http://www.ncwanted.com/unsolved/story/4065502/

Thanks for the link, Barbara. Jason's fear of having to actually sit down for a depo has made this a whole lot easier.

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 09:33 AM

You are 100% correct Leanne.
It will just be a formality for the judge to declare him the killer.....especially since an arrest is on the horizon.
The big question in the hearing (2 -3 months away) will be the damages awarded Cassidy.

This poster spins and spins totally bogus information and 2 others eat it up as fact. :no:
Linda's very competent attorney spoke yesterday and said :"by not responding, Jason Young is admitting guilt in the civil matter.....that Jason Young admits responsibility for his wife's death."

:seeya:Bud.

What do you think the chances are of an indictment before the hearing pertaining to the WDS? Does the entry of a Default Judgment in a case like this mean, as it does in this Country that, failing a successful application to set aside the D/J, the judge will merely rubber stamp the Clerk's entry with the exception of awarding damages? Both here and in South Africa, where I worked for 25 years as a para legal, it is always the C of the C who enters the judgment. I'm at a loss as to why certain posters say that Linda did not get a D/J today.

Wyn

12-03-2008, 09:35 AM

This is for the 2 posters that think Linda was motivated by greed

A court order that designates Cassidy Young, the couple's 4-year-old daughter, as the sole heir to Michelle Young's estate, including the payout from any life insurance policies

:beer:

Justice for Michelle and Rylan. :rose:

BSNBREVARDNC

12-03-2008, 10:03 AM

I would think he is still speaking for Jason and the Young family.

Kat

He is speaking for himself and himself alone. I have seen nothing to make me believe that he has been retained or asked by the Youngs to speak for them. If anyone knows differently, I would like to see the link.

If you knew KC like the folks in Brevard know KC you would have a much different opinion. He has not made our community proud.

BSNBREVARDNC

12-03-2008, 10:09 AM

Of course Smith is at least the architect of the over-all strategy. His lack of response seems to have rattled the opposing counsel.

I don't think rattled was the word. I think they said surprised. Going down without a fight when accused of killing your wife. Yes, That is surprising.

On the other hand, what else could he do. Give a deposition like BC, get caught in lies, and be arrested? Not responding to the WDS was a way to plead the 5th without having to pay for a lawyer. He knew that if he was disposed he would only incriminate himself and hurry along the inevitable. JMO

BTW, is it get colder or am I getting older?

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 10:18 AM

http://www.wral.com/news/local/video/3921928/

Cyber-sleuths help crack notorious cases

That was a good video Bud. Then people wonder why the DA released so much information in the last SW. With all the doubters around, no doubt they felt the need to show they have indeed been making progress. I can't wait until Friday to see what else is released.

Barbara2

12-03-2008, 12:39 PM

alter ego

12-03-2008, 12:58 PM

snipped
I'm at a loss as to why certain posters say that Linda did not get a D/J today.
Because she didn't. I posted the statute yesterday - a default judgement is a two-step process and Linda got the first step. The next step is for a judge to determine if the facts Linda presents to him support her pleading.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 01:00 PM

Poor Jason. He thought it would all just go away. I agree Wyn, his best option was to do nothing. Opening his mouth will seal his fate.Well that's pretty pathetic if LE can't get evidence to seal his fate w/o Jason opening his mouth.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:01 PM

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:06 PM

I think he is loyal for several reasons . One reason he has known JY his whole life and just can't see him capable of this. Another reason is he may know a lot that we don't know. I wouldn't doubt but that he knows why MY went to the therapist. Every one including a judge thought that was important to the case and yet when LE got the information JY wasn't arrested.
Perhaps the visits had nothing to do with him. MOO

I agree, there are a million message boards and chats if KC's goal was to just be heard.

But, he chose this Board to get out his message to defend his friend.

Nothing he can say can stop the arrest of Jason Young, should the evidence be there.

Nothing anyone can say will help the arrest of Jason Young, should the evidence not be there.

:shrug:

Kat

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 01:07 PM

Because she didn't. I posted the statute yesterday - a default judgement is a two-step process and Linda got the first step. The next step is for a judge to determine if the facts Linda presents to him support her pleading.

Well, an entry of D/J was entered in Court on 2 December. Sure, the judge will affirm the judgment and enter a $ amount and I'm willing to bet that is what will happen.

I'm as certain of that as I was that an Application to Dismiss the WDS would not be granted if it was filed at all.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:10 PM

Do you know how many people have said just this about known killers prior to their conviction (many of which confessed)?

Personally, my interpretation of the email exchange between Kim and JY in the last SW sounded like Kim even had doubts. If his own sister doubts, do I even need to look at neighbors or acquaintances for their take?

I think Kim was questioning some of Jason's choices of behavior and telling him how his actions would effect his daughter and to let him know, that he needed to address the situation of what is going on.

This does not mean Kim thinks her brother committed this crime.

JMO

Kat

alter ego

12-03-2008, 01:10 PM

I don't think rattled was the word. I think they said surprised. Going down without a fight when accused of killing your wife. Yes, That is surprising.

On the other hand, what else could he do. Give a deposition like BC, get caught in lies, and be arrested? Not responding to the WDS was a way to plead the 5th without having to pay for a lawyer. He knew that if he was disposed he would only incriminate himself and hurry along the inevitable. JMO

BTW, is it get colder or am I getting older?
I disagree. There was no certainty that he would have been deposed.

It is getting colder - and in the midst of global warming, too! :tongue:

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:12 PM

I just found this on wral:

http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/4069703/

I haven't had time to pick through it, as I am literally on my way out the door for lunch.

I am sure you guys will have sorted through it by the time I am back. Enjoy!

Thank you, this is a new warrant for his emails.

Kat

alter ego

12-03-2008, 01:12 PM

I believe that LE has enough evidence to seal Jason's fate. The lack of an arrest lies with the DA. It seems his best litigator is temporarily tied up in another area at this time. Because there is no statute of limitations perhaps the DA will not arrest Jason until she returns and is able to give her full attention to prosecuting Jason.Last I saw, LE hadn't solved the crime, so how could the lack of arrest lie with the DA? they can't file for an indictment on a case they don't have.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 01:14 PM

Thank you, this is a new warrant for his emails.

KatWonder why they didn't attach the SW in the article.

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 01:17 PM

I agree, there are a million message boards and chats if KC's goal was to just be heard.

But, he chose this Board to get out his message to defend his friend.

Nothing he can say can stop the arrest of Jason Young, should the evidence be there.

Nothing anyone can say will help the arrest of Jason Young, should the evidence not be there.

:shrug:

Kat

Seems like he's also posted on almost all those million message boards. For a more balanced view of JY, perhaps you should read on the msge board June/confused had a link to of his former work colleagues. After all, they had no personal investment in JY, unlike his former English teacher who, by his own admission, helped raise the slayer.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:18 PM

Wonder why they didn't attach the SW in the article.

Don't know, but it is for his Yahoo account.

We talked about this the other day, whether a warrant was needed or not, let me go check.

Kat

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 01:23 PM

Thank you, this is a new warrant for his emails.

Kat

Yeah, for a web based email account which mimi reckoned no warrant was needed for. Remember, you only need a subpoena according to her. Misinformation again I think.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 01:24 PM

How can you tell that LE hasn't solved the crime? What I have seen online is not the entire case that LE would have now. A lack of an arrest does not mean they do not know who did the crime, it means they have a reason for not making an arrest yet.
They have to get an indictment to make an arrest.

They have to turn the case over to the DA for an indictment to get filed.

They have to solve the case in order to turn it over to the DA.

jerry50

12-03-2008, 01:25 PM

I don't agree. I think if and when Jason is arrested it will be because of his affair and not his wife's murder. LE has built a case around his affair and I think it is like a house of cards it will fall. My Angel is an Angel of mercy I didn't know there were Angels of justice I thought justice was left up to the laws of our land.

What laws of the land? JY was served with an order from the court that he was being sued in a wrongful death case. If he respected the laws of the land he would have at least responded to it in some way. His refusal to respond is a rejection of the laws in our land. Whatever you think, a civil suit is a legal outlet in our society. JY doesn't respect anything and his actions prove it.

jerry50

12-03-2008, 01:28 PM

I think he is loyal for several reasons . One reason he has known JY his whole life and just can't see him capable of this. Another reason is he may know a lot that we don't know. I wouldn't doubt but that he knows why MY went to the therapist. Every one including a judge thought that was important to the case and yet when LE got the information JY wasn't arrested. Perhaps the visits had nothing to do with him. MOO

Even if Michelle told the therapist that she suspected JY was trying to kill her doesn't mean that LE would have evidence to arrest him. They still have to prove he did it, it just leads them in the right direction. And if JY didn't do it he should be talking to LE.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 01:28 PM

Well, an entry of D/J was entered in Court on 2 December. Sure, the judge will affirm the judgment and enter a $ amount and I'm willing to bet that is what will happen.

I'm as certain of that as I was that an Application to Dismiss the WDS would not be granted if it was filed at all.The entry is step one.

Step two includes the judge affirming there is evidence to support the original pleading and if he finds there is, he determines the $$$$ of the judgement and issues an order of judgement.

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 01:28 PM

What laws of the land? JY was served with an order from the court that he was being sued in a wrongful death case. If he respected the laws of the land he would have at least responded to it in some way. His refusal to respond is a rejection of the laws in our land. Whatever you think, a civil suit is a legal outlet in our society. JY doesn't respect anything and his actions prove it.

I can think of 2 Commandments he broke so why would one expect him to respect the laws of the land? Oh wait, maybe he's an atheist.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:29 PM

Yeah, for a web based email account which mimi reckoned no warrant was needed for. Remember, you only need a subpoena according to her. Misinformation again I think.

Who is Mimi?

Or, can you link the post, please?

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:32 PM

They have to get an indictment to make an arrest.

They have to turn the case over to the DA for an indictment to get filed.

They have to solve the case in order to turn it over to the DA.

I wonder what they are looking for in the emails, and why now, 25 months later?

I thought they had the correspondence between Jason and MM.

They are, just now, going to go look for it?
Kat

alter ego

12-03-2008, 01:35 PM

I wonder what they are looking for in the emails, and why now, 25 months later?

I thought they had the correspondence between Jason and MM.

They are, just now, going to go look for it?
Kat
On the surface, it appears they discovered the existence of the yahoo acct when they searched his old work laptop.

:shrug:

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 01:37 PM

I wonder what they are looking for in the emails, and why now, 25 months later?

I thought they had the correspondence between Jason and MM.

They are, just now, going to go look for it?
Kat

I doubt they are looking for emails from 25 months ago specifically - correspondence between JY, KY, MM and/or any other paramours subsequent thereto could be very valuable too, imo.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:37 PM

The entry is step one.

Step two includes the judge affirming there is evidence to support the original pleading and if he finds there is, he determines the $$$$ of the judgement and issues an order of judgement.

Here is something else I don't understand, that Sharon Rocha can not use anything from the criminal trial of SP in her civil suit.

Now, in this case, with the civil suit looking to proceed before the criminal suit, how is this ever going to work?

I don't think anyone is upset over the filing of the suit, if they are, cause everyone knows everything would go to C anyway.

In Laci's case, there were no children to be taken care of, and Scott was proven to be the killer and should not be entitled to any money, but the case keeps getting postponed, and it is now 5 years later.

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:40 PM

On the surface, it appears they discovered the existence of the yahoo acct when they searched his old work laptop.

:shrug:

Okay, thank you.

Kat

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 01:41 PM

Here is something else I don't understand, that Sharon Rocha can not use anything from the criminal trial of SP in her civil suit.

Now, in this case, with the civil suit looking to proceed before the criminal suit, how is this ever going to work?

I don't think anyone is upset over the filing of the suit, if they are, cause everyone knows everything would go to C anyway.

In Laci's case, there were no children to be taken care of, and Scott was proven to be the killer and should not be entitled to any money, but the case keeps getting postponed, and it is now 5 years later.

Kat

The problem in the Young case is, on the offchance that JY somehow managed to get his paws on the LI, he could have frittered the money away and there would have been nothing left for Cassidy. Alternatively, he could have continued to refuse to claim said LI and that money would not have gone to CY.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:41 PM

.

I would really like to find out what was said about warrants and subpoenas on Jason's computer.
Thank you.
Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 01:47 PM

I doubt they are looking for emails from 25 months ago specifically - correspondence between JY, KY, MM and/or any other paramours subsequent thereto could be very valuable
too, imo.

These are things that they should have been looking for , all along, not now, 25 months later.

Unless, like AE said, they just found this yahoo account.

I would think all communications stopped once the first emails were outed.

Kat

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 01:55 PM

These are things that they should have been looking for , all along, not now, 25 months later.

Unless, like AE said, they just found this yahoo account.

I would think all communications stopped once the first emails were outed.

Kat

Not all criminals behave as we would expect them to. He might have thought if he opened a new email account with a name totally different to anything like his own or anything previously used, he'd be in the clear. Who'd have thought he'd have continued communicating and who knows what else with MM?

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 02:24 PM

Not all criminals behave as we would expect them to. He might have thought if he opened a new email account with a name totally different to anything like his own or anything previously used, he'd be in the clear. Who'd have thought he'd have continued communicating and who knows what else with MM?

I don't know, but, we know about the photobucket pics , right?

And, the email was from Craiglist?

Would those be from his yahoo account?

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 02:26 PM

Barbara2

12-03-2008, 02:51 PM

Look closely at that photobucket account. It isn't the same user name that JY uses. In my opinion that is a bogus account. I am sure JY knows where the photos came from . He shared his daughters photos with her family big mistake.

That's one heck of an accusation you're making. Do you have any proof to back up this bogus claim? (And why would JY send pictures of HIMSELF and his mother to Michelle's family???)

Barbara2

12-03-2008, 02:56 PM

So you think Jason sent those pictures to his own family and they posted them in a bogus photobucket account?

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 03:06 PM

I don't know, but, we know about the photobucket pics , right?

And, the email was from Craiglist?

Would those be from his yahoo account?

Kat

Or were they from an imposter's yahoo account? Sounds as though LE isn't investigating Jason, they're investigating someone who has impersonated him. It's about time.

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 03:45 PM

Heres a link to where his Yahoo account name is being discussed. I could find many more if I had time to look for them . This person also noted that the photobucket and ebay account were not the usual that JY uses. I can't find a post number just read down about half way 10:51 AM if this helps. Thanks

http://frictionpowered.hqforums.com/1-vt116.html?postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=0

Thanks, confused. When I get the chance, I'll go over and read. I see in today's news, a guy in Colorado is being prosecuted for criminal libel for posting lies about a young woman on craigslist. 17 states have criminal libel laws. NC is one of them.

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 03:47 PM

You are correct Leanne. Its right here
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

12-02-2008, 12:12 AM
MerriMent
Registered User Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Trail's End
Posts: 624

No, only a subpoena is needed and the data is turned over to LE by the provider. LE do not directly access the servers and retrieve the data themselves.

Thanks JA - you are an angel. Reading through all the tripe once is more than enough for me - couldn't bring myself to do it a second time.

Leanne Weich

12-03-2008, 03:49 PM

How could LE just now be finding this Yahoo account. This account with Jason's account name has been posted repeatly over the last two years.

Are you sure Jason only had the account that has been posted repeatedly over the past two years? I doubt it myself.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 03:53 PM

None of what you posted answers my question, how do you know they haven't solved the case and know who murdered Michelle Young? Technically, they do not have to get an indictment to make the arrest, it's preferable though. The case has been turned over to the DA although they are still following leads etc. I believe this was made public when Sheriff Harrison said that all questions should be made to the DA's office in an interview some months ago.In NC they must have an indictment to make an arrest.

Referring questions about some SWs to the DA's office does not mean the case has been solved and turned over to the DA. No other questions were referred to the DA's by Sheriff Donnie and the Sheriff calls the case 'active' and it is listed as unsolved.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 03:57 PM

Here is something else I don't understand, that Sharon Rocha can not use anything from the criminal trial of SP in her civil suit.

Now, in this case, with the civil suit looking to proceed before the criminal suit, how is this ever going to work?

I don't think anyone is upset over the filing of the suit, if they are, cause everyone knows everything would go to C anyway.

In Laci's case, there were no children to be taken care of, and Scott was proven to be the killer and should not be entitled to any money, but the case keeps getting postponed, and it is now 5 years later.

KatThe ruling in the Peterson West WD suit was an eyepopper, that's for sure.

In this case Linda does not have a criminal conviction to rely upon for proof of her complaint. Still wondering what she is going to use to convince a judge her allegations are factual.

BSNBREVARDNC

12-03-2008, 04:05 PM

The ruling in the Peterson West WD suit was an eyepopper, that's for sure.

In this case Linda does not have a criminal conviction to rely upon for proof of her complaint. Still wondering what she is going to use to convince a judge her allegations are factual.

If JY defaults, then it should be easy. One side will make it's points with no worry about counterpoints. They can say here's what happened and there will be no one to disagree.

After all, I would think that the judge is there to hear the case, not to dispute it.

Does that make sense? Or am I way off base?

karen

12-03-2008, 04:08 PM

Wonder why they didn't attach the SW in the article.

Hmmmmm I wonder why..........LOL :punch:

alter ego

12-03-2008, 04:15 PM

Hmmmmm I wonder why..........LOL : punch :So you don't know either, huh.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 04:24 PM

If JY defaults, then it should be easy. One side will make it's points with no worry about counterpoints. They can say here's what happened and there will be no one to disagree.

After all, I would think that the judge is there to hear the case, not to dispute it.

Does that make sense? Or am I way off base?They can't just say 'here is what happened', they have to offer proof for the allegation.

If, in order to enable the judge to enter judgment or to carry it into effect, it is necessary to take an account or to determine the amount of damages or to establish the truth of any averment by evidence or to take an investigation of any other matter, the judge may conduct such hearings or order such references as the judge deems necessary and proper and shall accord a right of trial by jury to the parties when and as required by the Constitution or by any statute of North Carolina
http://law.justia.com/northcarolina/codes/chapter_1a/gs_1a-1,_rule_55.html

unless Jason fails to respond to the motion for a default judgement...

BSNBREVARDNC

12-03-2008, 04:43 PM

alter ego

12-03-2008, 04:49 PM

b. A motion for judgment by default may be decided by the court without a hearing if:

...

2. The party against whom judgment is sought fails to serve the response in accordance with this sub‑subdivision.

http://law.justia.com/northcarolina/codes/chapter_1a/gs_1a-1,_rule_55.html

If the defense does not offer anything at a hearing, it in no way shifts the burden of proof, which lies at the feet of the plaintiff. If they don't show up for a hearing as scheduled, the judge can sanction them and hold them in contempt.

BSNBREVARDNC

12-03-2008, 05:05 PM

b. A motion for judgment by default may be decided by the court without a hearing if:

...

2. The party against whom judgment is sought fails to serve the response in accordance with this sub‑subdivision.

http://law.justia.com/northcarolina/codes/chapter_1a/gs_1a-1,_rule_55.html

At some point I would think that they will need to present some sort of a case? I would think that a judge would require that in order receive any award for damages. How would this work in a case with a default judgment.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 05:21 PM

If JY defaults, then it should be easy. One side will make it's points with no worry about counterpoints. They can say here's what happened and there will be no one to disagree.

After all, I would think that the judge is there to hear the case, not to dispute it.

Does that make sense? Or am I way off base?

I think I understood you, not sure that is a good sign though.

But, are you saying that they can more or less make any kind of an

accusation, and because there is no one there to object, that it makes

it true or easier to prove?

You do know that Jason can contest the Judge's decision, the same as LF can..

Maybe that is what Jason and RS are doing, rather than fighting this

now, to wait until a decision is rendered?

Does that make sense?

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 05:24 PM

Yes but there is another yahoo account where the names were switched around. I am curious as to what computer this account will be traced to. The news article doesn't mention a computer just the email account. Thats the photobucket acct. and the craigs list email.

Are you allowed to say what the name is?

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 05:26 PM

They can't just say 'here is what happened', they have to offer proof for the allegation.

If, in order to enable the judge to enter judgment or to carry it into effect, it is necessary to take an account or to determine the amount of damages or to establish the truth of any averment by evidence or to take an investigation of any other matter, the judge may conduct such hearings or order such references as the judge deems necessary and proper and shall accord a right of trial by jury to the parties when and as required by the Constitution or by any statute of North Carolina
http://law.justia.com/northcarolina/codes/chapter_1a/gs_1a-1,_rule_55.html

unless Jason fails to respond to the motion for a default judgement...

I should have read this first, and I should have known you would have the answer,.

:beer:

Question:

But isn't the civil trial going to consist of jurors too, not just a Judge?

:shrug:

Kat

BSNBREVARDNC

12-03-2008, 05:29 PM

I think I understood you, not sure that is a good sign though.

But, are you saying that they can more or less make any kind of an

accusation, and because there is no one there to object, that it makes

it true or easier to prove?

You do know that Jason can contest the Judge's decision, the same as LF can..

Maybe that is what Jason and RS are doing, rather than fighting this

now, to wait until a decision is rendered?

Does that make sense?

Kay

Yes it does.

I was just wondering how a winner is rewarded in a one sided fight. I don't mean to make lite of the situation, but there must be more to it than the accuser telling their side of the story and the judge asking "how much do you want?" However, if the defendant doesn't show up what choice does the judge have? Is there some sort of a point of no return for the accused in a civil case?

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 05:30 PM

In the event that there is no one in the courtroom for the defense in a civil proceeding, (I guess this is the default part) what happens after the accusers present their side? What happens when there is no defense to be presented? It seems like the judge has very little to weigh in such a case.

I just asked almost the same thing, I don't understand what happens

if there is no one there to refute the charges.

This case is crazy.
Kat

BSNBREVARDNC

12-03-2008, 05:32 PM

I should have read this first, and I should have known you would have the answer,.

:beer:

Question:

But isn't the civil trial going to consist of jurors too, not just a Judge?

:shrug:

Kat

I may be wrong, but I thought that if I sued you, then you would get to decide if you wanted the trial to be heard in front of a jury or just a judge.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 05:33 PM

Yes it does.

I was just wondering how a winner is rewarded in a one sided fight. I don't mean to make lite of the situation, but there must be more to it than the accuser telling their side of the story and the judge asking "how much do you want?" However, if the defendant doesn't show up what choice does the judge have? Is there some sort of a point of no return for the accused in a civil case?

Oops, you got to my incorrect post, I mispelled my own name, wtg, me!
:hammer:

I don't know, and I wasn't making light of the case either, just trying to

understand the proper proceedings involved here.

It seems like since someone's life could be at stake, this is indeed an

extremely risky gamble, but that's why lawyers get the big bucks.

:shrug:

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 05:34 PM

I may be wrong, but I thought that if I sued you, then you would get to decide if you wanted the trial to be heard in front of a jury or just a judge.

You are going to sue me?

:seeya:

Kat

j.k

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 05:36 PM

alter ego

12-03-2008, 06:03 PM

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 06:11 PM

I am waiting for a copy of the s/w today, if anyone gets it, will you please link it?

Tia.

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 06:15 PM

Once a judge determines the allegations in the complaint have been proven, he must then determine the amt of the compensatory and punitive damages to award.

That will be based, in part, on the amt of salary Michelle would have earned until Cassidy turned 18, the defendant's ability to pay punitive damages (based on his revenue and/or net worth). NC limits punitive damages to 3x compensatory with a max of $250k.

Thank you...

Jason has never tried to collect the insurance money, so I bet he could care less about that.

If Jason were to deed the townhome over to someone, even C, could that stop anyone else from getting it?

I really don't think all this talk about money means that much, I bet when this case is over, we will see it had nothing to do with insurance money and money was clearly not a motive.

Money=$$$

Money= Not MM

Kat

alter ego

12-03-2008, 06:18 PM

I may be wrong, but I thought that if I sued you, then you would get to decide if you wanted the trial to be heard in front of a jury or just a judge.Either party can demand a jury trial in a civil action in NC. If no demand is made by either party, then a trial by jury is waived.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 06:20 PM

Thank you...

Jason has never tried to collect the insurance money, so I bet he could care less about that.

If Jason were to deed the townhome over to someone, even C, could that stop anyone else from getting it?

I really don't think all this talk about money means that much, I bet when this case is over, we will see it had nothing to do with insurance money and money was clearly not a motive.

Money=$$$

Money= Not MM

KatRight now, Jason has his half and Michelle's half of the townhome. If deemed a slayer then Michelle's half goes to her estate. He retains his half until his death at which time it goes to Michelle's estate.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 06:26 PM

Wait, so who has to show up?

The defense?

Even though they have conceded?

KatSure.

"... the judge may conduct such hearings or order such references as the judge deems necessary and proper and shall accord a right of trial by jury to the parties when and as required by the Constitution or by any statute of North Carolina...."

(from a link I posted previously)

that's if he opposes the motion for judgment by default

alter ego

12-03-2008, 06:55 PM

I should have read this first, and I should have known you would have the answer,.

:beer:

Question:

But isn't the civil trial going to consist of jurors too, not just a Judge?

:shrug:

KatIt will be a hearing at this point, but if req'd under law, then yes, by a jury.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 06:56 PM

Sure.

"... the judge may conduct such hearings or order such references as the judge deems necessary and proper and shall accord a right of trial by jury to the parties when and as required by the Constitution or by any statute of North Carolina...."

(from a link I posted previously)

that's if he opposes the motion for judgment by default

AE:

Does Jason HAVE to attend the civil court proceedings in person or can he send his lawyer on his behalf?

I swear I don't know what I would do without you to answer these q's, here.

Thank you, thank you.

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 07:04 PM

OT/

Peterson East is getting another day in court, according to WRAL.

Did he get the DP?

I am checking the site for release of today's warrant in this case.

Kat

alter ego

12-03-2008, 07:06 PM

AE:

Does Jason HAVE to attend the civil court proceedings in person or can he send his lawyer on his behalf?

I swear I don't know what I would do without you to answer these q's, here.

Thank you, thank you.

KatIt's my understanding that if Jason opposes the motion for a default judgement, he needs to show up to defend his opposition if nothing else.

Dominique

12-03-2008, 07:11 PM

Right now, Jason has his half and Michelle's half of the townhome. If deemed a slayer then Michelle's half goes to her estate. He retains his half until his death at which time it goes to Michelle's estate.

I am looking at NC law to verify but I think that if he is found guilty of her death, joint property would revert to her estate, either thru existing estate law or thru legal action filed on behalf of her estate. He would retain nothing. My opinion only and I am looking to verify.

Nope, I was wrong. Wow...NC needs to work on their slayer statute!

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 07:11 PM

It's my understanding that if Jason opposes the motion for a default judgement, he needs to show up to defend his opposition if nothing else.

Wow!!

You are the best, you and Merri sure know the law !!

Thank you, I am impressed!!

Kat

alter ego

12-03-2008, 07:20 PM

Wow!!

You are the best, you and Merri sure know the law !!

Thank you, I am impressed!!

KatDon't be too impressed, I don't always get it right.

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 07:22 PM

Don't be too impressed, I don't always get it right.

You have so far!!

And, I appreciate it.

Now, why won't they release a copy of the s/w?

Kat

jerry50

12-03-2008, 07:22 PM

Thank you...

Jason has never tried to collect the insurance money, so I bet he could care less about that.

If Jason were to deed the townhome over to someone, even C, could that stop anyone else from getting it?

I really don't think all this talk about money means that much, I bet when this case is over, we will see it had nothing to do with insurance money and money was clearly not a motive.

Money=$$$

Money= Not MM

Kat

The reason JY did not file for the life insurance is for the same reason that he did not answer the civil suit: he would have to testify under oath.
How can he not have money problems when he is not working? Since the murder he and ACassidy have shuttled between Heather's and his mom's. If he had the money he should be giving Cassidy a stable home life in their own home.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 07:37 PM

The reason JY did not file for the life insurance is for the same reason that he did not answer the civil suit: he would have to testify under oath.
snip
OR

to debunk the LI policy as motive for murder.

Barbara2

12-03-2008, 07:40 PM

OR

to debunk the LI policy as motive for murder.

That doesn't make sense to me. They don't need a motive but they have one in the form of the affair with MM. They certainly don't need another one. To refuse to collect the money that is there for the benefit of his child is suspicious in and of itself. IMO

jerry50

12-03-2008, 07:50 PM

That doesn't make sense to me. They don't need a motive but they have one in the form of the affair with MM. They certainly don't need another one. To refuse to collect the money that is there for the benefit of his child is suspicious in and of itself. IMO
You're right. He has no job and no hopes of getting one until this murder is solved so the money from the LI would be needed, if nothing else, to take care of Cassidy in the manner she was cared for when her Mother was alive.

Cardinal

12-03-2008, 08:15 PM

Anybody have a clue what this means? It's from section 9 of Linda's foolish venture.

Section 9: .....that the court declare Linda (the plaintiff) be in charge of
"directing distribution of any applicable assets or benefits in accordance
with said law."

Thanks. --Kingcole

You've misquoted that section. It actually says:

"Whether Jason Young is determined to be Michelle Young's slayer through this action or through the criminal process, as also provided in 31A-3, Plaintiff seeks a judgment declaring that Jason Young is barred from collecting any insurance benefits, that Jason Young is subject to all the provisions of Article 3 of Chapter 31A, and directing distribution of any applicable assets or benefits in accordance with said law."

http://www.wral.com/asset/news/local/2008/11/04/3893878/Linda_Fisher_wrongful_death_lawsuit_against_Jason_ Young.pdf

It says nothing about Linda being in charge of the distribution of assets. It instead acknowledges that applicable law would control the distribution. :read:

Cardinal

12-03-2008, 08:16 PM

It means LF got the bucks KC. I guess we will know when Cassie turns 18 what she will get.

Wrong. See my post to KC.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 08:26 PM

That doesn't make sense to me. They don't need a motive but they have one in the form of the affair with MM. They certainly don't need another one. To refuse to collect the money that is there for the benefit of his child is suspicious in and of itself. IMONo it's not.

If he collected it, it would be 'suspicious in and of itself' and could be claimed as motive.

Motive never has and never will be an element of murder. But no motive is CE of innocence.

Since Jason and MM didn't end up together, the affair is pretty flimsy motive for murder.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 08:28 PM

You're right. He has no job and no hopes of getting one until this murder is solved so the money from the LI would be needed, if nothing else, to take care of Cassidy in the manner she was cared for when her Mother was alive.
Is there any proof that Cassidy is lacking in any basic needs or that she is not being taken care of "in the manner she was cared for when her Mother was alive"?

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 08:30 PM

Wrong. See my post to KC.

Hi Card and all,

I don't know where today's actual warrant is, but am I wrong

in thinking that this is for the same computer that they already had,

and this warrant was just for emails @Yahoo, nothing else?

When do we find out what was on his work computer?

Also, and I am probably wrong again, but it seems like we have seen

more action since the filing of the civil suit, like L E needs to give LF

some ammunition in her wrongful death suit.

:shrug:

Kat

jerry50

12-03-2008, 08:31 PM

I thought he had a friend that was very wealthy and owned several business ventures. Don't you think he would give him a job?

Link? Is he working now?

Kat4Eagles

12-03-2008, 08:33 PM

Is there any proof that Cassidy is lacking in any basic needs or that she is not being taken care of "in the manner she was cared for when her Mother was alive"?

Good point, we know that is not true.

C looks well taken care..

:)
Kat

jerry50

12-03-2008, 08:33 PM

Is there any proof that Cassidy is lacking in any basic needs or that she is not being taken care of "in the manner she was cared for when her Mother was alive"?

The poor child was home alone with a bloody corpse for hours before she was rescued by her beloved Aunt. She gets torn away from her Mother's family and goes to live in an assortment of houses. If you don't think that this is going to affect this poor child someday you are wrong.

Cardinal

12-03-2008, 08:33 PM

No it's not.

If he collected it, it would be 'suspicious in and of itself' and could be claimed as motive.

Motive never has and never will be an element of murder. But no motive is CE of innocence.

Since Jason and MM didn't end up together, the affair is pretty flimsy motive for murder.

I'm not convinced Jason intended to end up with MM. I still think that Jason wanted to remain married to Michelle........with a honey on the side.

JMO

Barbara2

12-03-2008, 08:36 PM

I'm not convinced Jason intended to end up with MM. I still think that Jason wanted to remain married to Michelle........with a honey on the side.

JMO

I don't know that he wanted MM exclusively but I think he definitely wanted away from MY.

Cardinal

12-03-2008, 08:36 PM

Hi Card and all,

I don't know where today's actual warrant is, but am I wrong

in thinking that this is for the same computer that they already had,

and this warrant was just for emails @Yahoo, nothing else?

When do we find out what was on his work computer?

Also, and I am probably wrong again, but it seems like we have seen

more action since the filing of the civil suit, like L E needs to give LF

some ammunition in her wrongful death suit.

:shrug:

Kat

Hi, Kat. I'm not sure what this warrant was for - I wish the media would publish it.

And I've commented before on the seemingly increased activity since the filing of the WDS. But I don't think it's to give LF ammunition. I think it's a confluence of events, leading to an indictment.

JMO

Cardinal

12-03-2008, 08:37 PM

I don't know that he wanted MM exclusively but I think he definitely wanted away from MY.

And I think, instead, Michelle wanted away from him.

alter ego

12-03-2008, 08:39 PM

The poor child was home alone with a bloody corpse for hours before she was rescued by her beloved Aunt. She gets torn away from her Mother's family and goes to live in an assortment of houses. If you don't think that this is going to affect this poor child someday you are wrong.What does that have to do with her not being taken care of because there is not enough money to do so?

alter ego

12-03-2008, 08:47 PM

I'm not convinced Jason intended to end up with MM. I still think that Jason wanted to remain married to Michelle........with a honey on the side.

JMOIt appears he kept his honey on the side after Michelle's murder. :shrug:

alter ego

12-03-2008, 08:49 PM

Hi Card and all,

I don't know where today's actual warrant is, but am I wrong

in thinking that this is for the same computer that they already had,

and this warrant was just for emails @Yahoo, nothing else?

When do we find out what was on his work computer?

Also, and I am probably wrong again, but it seems like we have seen

more action since the filing of the civil suit, like L E needs to give LF

some ammunition in her wrongful death suit.

:shrug:

KatThe article about the newly returned warrant lists the same probable cause in the last warrant we saw.

so :shrug:

Cardinal

12-03-2008, 08:54 PM

It appears he kept his honey on the side after Michelle's murder. :shrug:

If the rumors are true, he kept more than one honey on the side, concurrently - MM and the honey du jour. Which just reinforces my belief that he didn't intend to commit to MM.

Barbara2

12-03-2008, 09:49 PM

If they didn't have a warrant for them already how did they show them in the PC on the Nov 6th. warrant?

They could have gotten those from the computer that was seized previously but may have wanted ALL of the email correspondence from that account. Since it's a web based account, it could have been accessed from any computer with internet access.

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 10:40 PM

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 10:43 PM

OR

to debunk the LI policy as motive for murder.

that's a pretty good reason for an innocent man to remain silent.

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 10:51 PM

The SW was for youngpack@yahoo.com.

I do recall reading a poster argue for pages that the cops would not use a SW for a web e-mail account.

Bogus information posted as fact yet again :lol:

It wasn't bogus information. There was no search warrant for the emails between Jason and Kim that were quoted in the 11/06 warrant. If I'm wrong, I suggest you link to the returned warrant.

MerriMent

12-03-2008, 10:57 PM

If they didn't have a warrant for them already how did they show them in the PC on the Nov 6th. warrant?

exactly. The 11/06 warrant quoted emails. How did LE get those emails? Most likely by subpoena or some other court order. They may have tapped his ISP and were monitoring real-time for all we know.

Is today's warrant available online yet? I don't believe it is Jason's yahoo! account but is, instead, one an imposter set up to impersonate him. Thus, the need for a search warrant.

5swab5

12-03-2008, 11:10 PM

exactly. The 11/06 warrant quoted emails. How did LE get those emails? Most likely by subpoena or some other court order. They may have tapped his ISP and were monitoring real-time for all we know.

Is today's warrant available online yet? I don't believe it is Jason's yahoo! account but is, instead, one an imposter set up to impersonate him. Thus, the need for a search warrant.

Poor, Poor Jason. Boy can't catch a break.

Maybe it wasn't really him in the sack with MM. Wonder if she can pick him out of a lineup?

MOO

JD1974

12-03-2008, 11:24 PM

Perhaps this opens the way for a request to remove the child from Jason's custody since he has admitted guilt by default. IMO

I think his lawyer will go to court and use the argument that if Jason has to be deposed for the civil suit then he is basically giving up his right to not self incriminate himself. Jason has the criminal proceedings hanging over his head at the moment, if he does a deposition that can be used against him criminally. I think Jason's lawyer is very smart, either way the money goes to Cassidy, so exactly how is it hurting him to default on the WD suit when it will benefit his daughter in the end. Also think about this, Jason has custody of Cassidy, if Linda wins the WD suit the money goes to Cassidy, with Jason as her legal guardian he is in essence recieving the ins policy without ever filing for it. Another thing too, the argument I think the lawyer will use will be for any criminal trial and will be used to keep the default of the WD suit out of the criminal proceedings. If Linda wanted to go for custody of Cassidy she would of already done so, look at the search warrants that have already been released, Brad Cooper lost custody of his children on less than that.

ETA Just because Jason loses custody of his daughter does not mean Linda would recieve custody automatically, if what was said about the will is true, Michelle's wish was that Jason's sister recieve custody. Since Jason's sister didn't kill Michelle there would be no reason to remove her from being caretaker to Cassidy.

Kat4Eagles

12-04-2008, 12:24 AM

Interesting argument there, JD. Thanks.
About the custody issue....You're right. There is no issue.

Besides, both Linda and Meredith are handicapped when it
comes to custody....that's why they don't talk about it.
The talk comes only from some deluded board posters.

--Kingcole

I would like to hear more about this as it has been alluded to before.

Is there a reason the Fishers could not get C, as I have never been
able to get past the fact that they have not tried.

We will never know if Alan, Michelle's father, would have tried to get C either, but it seems he and Jason got along well.

Do you believe that Alan believed Jason was innocent?

These are a lot of questions, I know, sorry!!

Kat

Kat4Eagles

12-04-2008, 12:32 AM

exactly. The 11/06 warrant quoted emails. How did LE get those emails? Most likely by subpoena or some other court order. They may have tapped his ISP and were monitoring real-time for all we know.

Is today's warrant available online yet? I don't believe it is Jason's yahoo! account but is, instead, one an imposter set up to impersonate him. Thus, the need for a search warrant.

Still no warrant available, huh?

What is the hold~up?

I guess we have to wait for Friday, at least I guessed that date right.

ETA.
I wish we could turn the time back to 25 months ago exactly to this moment,
and be able to change the outcome of the events that were about to happen.

:(
Kat

MerriMent

12-04-2008, 12:41 AM

They could have gotten those from the computer that was seized previously but may have wanted ALL of the email correspondence from that account. Since it's a web based account, it could have been accessed from any computer with internet access.

Could be accessed from any computer by anybody who had the password. And each access would have left an IP trail.

MerriMent

12-04-2008, 12:51 AM

Jason's parental rights are intact. In order to lose custody, Fisher would have to prove Jason is an unfit parent and she's a better fit. An impossible task, imo.

MerriMent

12-04-2008, 12:56 AM

Fishers never tried because they were too focused on trying to get the cops to arrest Jason. The goal has always been to control money, not to parent a toddler. JMO, of course.

alter ego

12-04-2008, 01:22 AM

Jason's parental rights are intact. In order to lose custody, Fisher would have to prove Jason is an unfit parent and she's a better fit. An impossible task, imo.

If I'm understanding it correctly.....if Linda prevails in the default judgement, then Jason will be considered to have preceeded Michelle in death so the terms set forth in Michelle's will will kick in. If the will stipulates custody of Cassidy to Jason's sister, then Linda will be barred from petitioning the court for visitation because there was no ongoing custody dispute between Michelle and Jason. If Jason's sister adopts Cassidy, then Linda might have a shot if she can prove a substantial relationship exists between herself and Cassidy.

(still :read:ing )

annalyzer

12-04-2008, 01:45 AM

How do we know Michelle had a will and what was in it if she did have a will?

MerriMent

12-04-2008, 03:11 AM

If I'm understanding it correctly.....if Linda prevails in the default judgement, then Jason will be considered to have preceeded Michelle in death so the terms set forth in Michelle's will will kick in. If the will stipulates custody of Cassidy to Jason's sister, then Linda will be barred from petitioning the court for visitation because there was no ongoing custody dispute between Michelle and Jason. If Jason's sister adopts Cassidy, then Linda might have a shot if she can prove a substantial relationship exists between herself and Cassidy.

(still :read:ing )

Thanks. In terms of parental rights, I don't believe Jason's parental rights can be challenged unless he's convicted and sentenced in criminal court.

freejason

12-04-2008, 08:59 AM

Barbara2

12-04-2008, 11:14 AM

So, let's say for discussion's sake that JY has no lawyer. That would make it more understandable why there was no response to the WDS. But, if you were JY and got served from the WDS, wouldn't you go get secure one?

Anyone ever get the feeling that maybe he is trying to "camoflauge" and hope that no one will notice him and it will all eventually just go away?

According to the search warrant and the email exchange with his sister, that is exactly what he thinks will happen. IMO

annalyzer

12-04-2008, 11:18 AM

annalyzer

12-04-2008, 11:19 AM

Barbara I owe you a Coke. :tongue:

alter ego

12-04-2008, 01:06 PM

How 'bout his FAILURE TO RESPOND?
What about it? How does that "establish the truth of any averment by evidence" per Rule 55(2)(a) of the Rules of Civil Procedure?

alter ego

12-04-2008, 01:10 PM

http://www.wral.com/news/local/document/4076660/

(probable cause is a cut&paste of the search warrant for Jason's old work laptop from last month)

MerriMent

12-04-2008, 02:57 PM

"Silly me" told her they needed a search warrant and that's exactly what they got...a search warrant. :rolleyes:

Our exchange was about his emails to his sister that were included in the 11/06 search warrant. There was no search warrant to obtain those emails.

Search warrants are used when the DA expects results will be used as evidence AT TRIAL.

Cardinal

12-04-2008, 07:32 PM

This is from the article Bud linked to from NCWanted and I find it a bit curious:

"In emails to his sister, Kim Young, the November warrant quotes Jason praising his then-attorney, Roger Smith, Jr. of Raleigh."

Is it me, or has there been no affirmation that Mr. Smith is STILL Jason's lawyer? The way things have been worded the past few days it makes me wonder.

It isn't just you. I find it curious, too. I have some doubts that Roger Smith is still representing Jason.

Wow, the board got really quiet today. Is something brewing? Maybe the SW that is supposed to be unsealed tomorrow?

5swab5

12-04-2008, 08:04 PM

It isn't just you. I find it curious, too. I have some doubts that Roger Smith is still representing Jason.

Wow, the board got really quiet today. Is something brewing? Maybe the SW that is supposed to be unsealed tomorrow?

I don't think Smith is involved anymore either. Smart move, if true.

Somehow, I can't see Jason hiding up in the mountains like Rudolph tho, how's he gonna keep that cell phone that is permanently attached to his ear charged?

You are right, very quiet. I suspect that Jason's supporters in Brevard are helping him with his spray on tan, hair weave and false nails and eye lashes for his disguise after the SW is released tomorrow.

MOO

annalyzer

12-04-2008, 08:16 PM

Cardinal

12-04-2008, 08:26 PM

Hi Card. So tomorrow more news.

Hey just noticed we have new smileys! :w00t:

Oh, cool!!! :thumbsup: I like them!

Hopefully tomorrow there will be more news. And I really do have a sense that something is brewing. I think an indictment is getting closer.

alter ego

12-04-2008, 08:35 PM

Oh, cool!!! :thumbsup: I like them!

Hopefully tomorrow there will be more news. And I really do have a sense that something is brewing. I think an indictment is getting closer.
I dunno. They still haven't received his Yahoo! acct info and everything revealed in the warrants has been known to LE for some time and still the case has not been turned over to the DA for an indictment. Just more search warrants issued.

:shrug:

I love all the new smilies too :w00t:

JHP

12-04-2008, 08:35 PM

Oh, cool!!! :thumbsup: I like them!

Hopefully tomorrow there will be more news. And I really do have a sense that something is brewing. I think an indictment is getting closer.

I hope your right Cardinal. Do you think Mr. Smith would have stated he's not representing Mr. Young at this time, instead of "No Comment" If he had truly cut ties with him. Or Maybe he's thinking he'll get called if there is an indictment.

I like this one:tonguewag: but I'm not sure if I can use it much.