Michelle Young..Oct.4th.'til

[5swab5]

Please continue.

I hope things speed up!

Swabby

[Cardinal]

Originally Posted by Maddox

Cardinal,
Any thoughts on the wrongful death deadline that is fast approaching ?
Linda will need 'legal standing' before she can file.
I suppose she can sue JY for that 'standing' and file the WD in the same motion.

I don't know if it could be done in the same motion, Maddox, but it could be done sequentially if all of the paperwork were in order. The time frame is getting pretty tight though.

Something else occurs to me - the statute of limitations for Cassidy to file doesn't start running until she turns 18, I believe.

JMO

[gbmy]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

I don't know if it could be done in the same motion, Maddox, but it could be done sequentially if all of the paperwork were in order. The time frame is getting pretty tight though.

Something else occurs to me - the statute of limitations for Cassidy to file doesn't start running until she turns 18, I believe.

JMO

We have no new information to suggest that things are going to change here.......Coming up on 2 years now. We could hit 3. Then 4. And then 5. And if we do, all of the JDI's will still be taking the same position they are now using the same old rationale........Ya gotta make sure your case is iron clad. Dot the i's, cross the t's. Don't rush to judgement. All true. But at some point, when you hear that over and over again, it just loses a little meaning each and every day.

Yeah, some murders have taken 10+ years to solve. And, if this board is open 8 more years, the JDI's will be saying the same thing....

[Cardinal]

Originally Posted by gbmy

We have no new information to suggest that things are going to change here.......Coming up on 2 years now. We could hit 3. Then 4. And then 5. And if we do, all of the JDI's will still be taking the same position they are now using the same old rationale........Ya gotta make sure your case is iron clad. Dot the i's, cross the t's. Don't rush to judgement. All true. But at some point, when you hear that over and over again, it just loses a little meaning each and every day.

Yeah, some murders have taken 10+ years to solve. And, if this board is open 8 more years, the JDI's will be saying the same thing....

So what if they are? The length of time it takes doesn't make the JDIs wrong or the JIIs right, imo. I'm sorry if it's losing meaning for you. If I'm still alive, and it takes 10 more years, I'll still be waiting for justice for Michelle and Rylan.

[5swab5]

Originally Posted by gbmy

We have no new information to suggest that things are going to change here.......Coming up on 2 years now. We could hit 3. Then 4. And then 5. And if we do, all of the JDI's will still be taking the same position they are now using the same old rationale........Ya gotta make sure your case is iron clad. Dot the i's, cross the t's. Don't rush to judgement. All true. But at some point, when you hear that over and over again, it just loses a little meaning each and every day.

Yeah, some murders have taken 10+ years to solve. And, if this board is open 8 more years, the JDI's will be saying the same thing....

I think the same could be said of the JI²s.

MOO

Swabby

[Barbara2]

Originally Posted by gbmy

We have no new information to suggest that things are going to change here.......Coming up on 2 years now. We could hit 3. Then 4. And then 5. And if we do, all of the JDI's will still be taking the same position they are now using the same old rationale........Ya gotta make sure your case is iron clad. Dot the i's, cross the t's. Don't rush to judgement. All true. But at some point, when you hear that over and over again, it just loses a little meaning each and every day.

Yeah, some murders have taken 10+ years to solve. And, if this board is open 8 more years, the JDI's will be saying the same thing....

So are you trying to suggest that the investigators should give up? Do you WANT Michelle and Rylan's murderer to go free? Serious question.

[annalyzer]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

So what if they are? The length of time it takes doesn't make the JDIs wrong or the JIIs right, imo. I'm sorry if it's losing meaning for you. If I'm still alive, and it takes 10 more years, I'll still be waiting for justice for Michelle and Rylan.

Same here Cardinal but please Lord let it be sooner.

[5swab5]

Originally Posted by Maddox

And your point is

The cops and Wake county DA knew Ann Miller poisoned her husband Eric , but it took 4 years for this same DA to move on the indictment.

That was a travesty!

The worst part of the DA dragging his feet, was the child. False hopes and dreams after already losing one parent.

I see the same thing in Cassidy's future, unfortunately.

MOO

Swabby

[annalyzer]

Off to google Ann Miller..........

[Cardinal]

Originally Posted by annalyzer

Same here Cardinal but please Lord let it be sooner.

Amen.



o/t I see what you mean about too many letters.

[annalyzer]

Originally Posted by Maddox

In the end, the DA had far from a slam dunk case, yet she plead guilty on a deal to 2nd degree murder.

Pull the trigger Colin, Linda needs to be in CY's life again.

What a wicked witch. Was it ever found out when and how she gave him the poison?

I see the grandparent's are refusing to let their granddaughter visit her mother in prison. Good!

[Barbara2]

Originally Posted by Maddox

Who knows, maybe the size 10 shoes belonged to an accomplice of JY ?

I have thought of that possibility too, but I think it would be an accomplice after the fact. It's possible that he had to call on a trusted family member or friend to help with the aftermath so that he could get back to Virginia.

[Jules2]

Originally Posted by Reinya

Probably but do they have anything better to do? Doubtful. So far, those who have steadfastly held to their view that Jason is innocent are the ones who seem to be right. Those who have invested years spreading the *Jason and only Jason did it* mantra have accomplished nothing of value. The considerable passage of time and inability for LE to solve this crime is an indication the answer isn't *Jason and only Jason did it.*

Murders that have taken years to solve have usually involved co-conspiracies.

The ones who seem to be right?

Excuse me, but there has been plenty posted by the JDI's that is valuable, truthful and extremely logical. In fact most of the far-fetched posts have been those of the JII's.

Perhaps you were dreaming when you posted. That's okay, though.......You'll get a wake up call soon enough.


IMO

[5swab5]

Originally Posted by Reinya

(snipped)Murders that have taken years to solve have usually involved co-conspiracies.

Got a linky-poo for that?

Otherwise it is just drivel.

MOO

Swabby

[5swab5]

Originally Posted by Reinya

Doubtful, if JY was also there himself. He didn't need an accomplice.

How can Jason "also" be there himself.......without an accomplice?

MOO

Swabby

[annalyzer]

Originally Posted by 5swab5

How can Jason "also" be there himself.......without an accomplice?

MOO

Swabby

In addition to the ones known to be there, Michelle and Cassidy?

[gbmy]

Originally Posted by Cardinal

So what if they are? The length of time it takes doesn't make the JDIs wrong or the JIIs right, imo. I'm sorry if it's losing meaning for you. If I'm still alive, and it takes 10 more years, I'll still be waiting for justice for Michelle and Rylan.

I agree with you that justice is what's important. What's also important to me is to feel compassion and empathy for a free man with no criminal record who has lost his 29 year old wife to a tragic murder and is raising a daughter who suddenly found herself without a mother whom she loved.

This is why I defend JY and seek justice for Michelle. I don't know the truth, but it will eventually come out. It sounds like you're of the opinion that if 5, 10, 15, or 20 more years go by that it's just as likely as it is today that JY murdered his wife assuming no new information. I don't share that opinion.

[gbmy]

Originally Posted by Barbara2

So are you trying to suggest that the investigators should give up? Do you WANT Michelle and Rylan's murderer to go free? Serious question.

The answer is clearly no to both questions. My hope is to solicit compassion for a free man and single parent with no criminal record who tragically lost his wife in a senseless murder.

[Barbara2]

Originally Posted by gbmy

The answer is clearly no to both questions. My hope is to solicit compassion for a free man and single parent with no criminal record who tragically lost his wife in a senseless murder.

Being free and having no record does not equate innocence. There are plenty of murderers with no priors.

[Jules2]

Originally Posted by Reinya

sorry but there is nothing remotely logical or even intelligent about a theory that has Jason as a lone killer who changed shoes and stepped on a pillow twice.

It's more logical than 99% of the theories you've gone on and on about.

I see you are back to posting as your usual self. I see the initial "niceness" and non-insulting posts to disguise your identity didn't last very long.

I can hardly keep up with placing all your nics on ignore these days.

[Barbara2]

Originally Posted by Jules2

It's more logical than 99% of the theories you've gone on and on about.

I see you are back to posting as your usual self. I see the initial "niceness" and non-insulting posts to disguise your identity didn't last very long.

I can hardly keep up with placing all your nics on ignore these days.

It's pretty easy. You don't have to put the nics on ignore. You just don't pay any attention to her. It works.

[gbmy]

Originally Posted by Barbara2

Being free and having no record does not equate innocence. There are plenty of murderers with no priors.

Ok Barbara2, let me try again using different verbage. It's a fact that JY's legally innocent. It's a fact that he's a single parent who has lost his wife in a tragic murder. And, it's a fact that I personally have compassion for such a person.

[Barbara2]

Originally Posted by gbmy

Ok Barbara2, let me try again using different verbage. It's a fact that JY's legally innocent. It's a fact that he's a single parent who has lost his wife in a tragic murder. And, it's a fact that I personally have compassion for such a person.

Did you also have compassion for OJ Simpson when he was in a similar situation?

[gbmy]

Originally Posted by Barbara2

Did you also have compassion for OJ Simpson when he was in a similar situation?

I absolutely did. And, so did the 12 jurors. But today I don't have much compassion for him since he was found to have commited an armed robbery and faces up to life in prison.

[Barbara2]

Originally Posted by gbmy

I absolutely did. And, so did the 12 jurors. But today I don't have much compassion for him since he was found to have commited an armed robbery and faces up to life in prison.

Being found "not guilty" is not the same as being found "innocent". Not being charged with a crime is not the same as being innocent either. Someone killed Michelle and Rylan and that person has not been charged. That person is still just as guilty as they will be when the verdict is read. IMO

Originally Posted by Reinya

I suggest you provide a link to the theories I've "gone on and on about."

I use one and only one nic here. I've noticed you have a bad habit of resorting to baseless insults and accusations at anybody and everybody who disagrees with you. Very tacky and certainly reflects your lack of maturity.

Can you possibly post without that nastiness in your comments? The majority of posters here want to discuss this case, and you seem to be here just to insult posters and basically, pick a fight. Thank you

Originally Posted by Reinya

sorry but there is nothing remotely logical or even intelligent about a theory that has Jason as a lone killer who changed shoes and stepped on a pillow twice.

Everyone here is entitled to their opinion, about the murder case that is. I don't recall there being a free pass to insult fellow posters by calling them unintelligent or illogical and you continue to do that with nearly every one of your posts. Very rude and immature...

Originally Posted by sonya View Post

A well placed kick could have stopped the strangulation attempt, easily

************************
gbmy answered:
Sure, you're right, it 'could' have.

************************

Yes, that's right it could have stopped Jason from strangling Michelle and it probably did !

[Barbara2]

Originally Posted by sonya

Originally Posted by sonya View Post

A well placed kick could have stopped the strangulation attempt, easily

************************
gbmy answered:
Sure, you're right, it 'could' have.

************************

Yes, that's right it could have stopped Jason from strangling Michelle and it probably did !

I don't think some realize how difficult it must be for a person to look into the eyes of a human being and strangle the life out of them. It is even more difficult if the person is one that you are supposed to love. If that person resists at all, I imagine it would be tough to continue. Much easier to beat them from behind without having to look at their face. IMO

[annalyzer]

Originally Posted by gbmy

I absolutely did. And, so did the 12 jurors. But today I don't have much compassion for him since he was found to have commited an armed robbery and faces up to life in prison.

Are you saying you had compassion for OJ because he wasn't found guilty of the murders but now don't have compassion since he was found guilty of armed robbery?

[gbmy]

Originally Posted by Barbara2

Being found "not guilty" is not the same as being found "innocent". Not being charged with a crime is not the same as being innocent either. Someone killed Michelle and Rylan and that person has not been charged. That person is still just as guilty as they will be when the verdict is read. IMO

Let me make sure I understand your points.

1. If you're found not guilty, it's 'possible' you really could be guilty.
2. If you're found guilty, it's 'possible' you really could be innocent.

and, from the moment the crime is commited to any point in time in the future, you're just as guilty or innocent.

If conveying this point was the intent of your post, I'll let others comment on its value. I'll just say 'I understand'.

[gbmy]

Originally Posted by annalyzer

Are you saying you had compassion for OJ because he wasn't found guilty of the murders but now don't have compassion since he was found guilty of armed robbery?

Yes. I have more compassion for innocent, law abiding citizens than for people who are justice system determines broke the law.

[Barbara2]

Originally Posted by gbmy

Let me make sure I understand your points.

1. If you're found not guilty, it's 'possible' you really could be guilty.
2. If you're found guilty, it's 'possible' you really could be innocent.

and, from the moment the crime is commited to any point in time in the future, you're just as guilty or innocent.

If conveying this point was the intent of your post, I'll let others comment on its value. I'll just say 'I understand'.

No. My point is that someone is guilty. Someone killed a beautiful woman and her baby. That person doesn't have to have a jury declare them guilty. That person was guilty from the moment the crime was committed. Many believe based on the little known evidence that that person guilty of killing Michelle may well be her husband. If he did kill her, not having been brought before the courts doesn't make him any less guilty of the crime. That was my point.

[annalyzer]

Originally Posted by gbmy

Yes. I have more compassion for innocent, law abiding citizens than for people who are justice system determines broke the law.

Uh, just because that jury found OJ not guilty does not mean he didn't murder Nicole and Ron.

[gbmy]

Originally Posted by Barbara2

<snipped> Many believe based on the little known evidence that that person guilty of killing Michelle may well be her husband. If he did kill her, not having been brought before the courts doesn't make him any less guilty of the crime. That was my point. <snipped>

Knowing the infallible truth like God does, then of course that's true. But, we can only carry on a discussion as mere mortals. If someone is arrested for a crime and brought before the courts, then most mortals would believe that person is more likely to be guilty. If JY is arrested and brought before the court, then as a mortal, I'd believe he's more likely to be guilty. And, so would the DA. After, that's why they are waiting correct? They want to make sure they can be as close as possible to convicting 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.

[jerzeegirl]

Originally Posted by Barbara2

No. My point is that someone is guilty. Someone killed a beautiful woman and her baby. That person doesn't have to have a jury declare them guilty. That person was guilty from the moment the crime was committed. Many believe based on the little known evidence that that person guilty of killing Michelle may well be her husband. If he did kill her, not having been brought before the courts doesn't make him any less guilty of the crime. That was my point.

wow barbara, i totally agree with your post here. So many here like to woo hoo and cheer each day that goes by that JY is not arrested. I understand, they think he is innocent but it seems they also think just the fact that he hasnt been arrested or named a person of interest or suspect, that he is innocent. So not true, so many cold cases in filing cabinets across this country, does that mean these murder victims werent murdered, because noone was arrested? Of course not.....someone is guilty, but they got away with it. So many people get away with murder and its truly disgusting.

I believe drew peterson killed his first and second wife. Im hoping some day he will be arrested, tried and convicted of both wives murders. Until then, hes walking around free as a bird. Does that mean he didnt do it? If he did, he got away with it twice, and some people here find it impossible that JY could get away with it once, so he must not be guilty.

Also find it interesting that Ann Miller was never named a person of interest nor a suspect.

JMO

[Barbara2]

Originally Posted by gbmy

Knowing the infallible truth like God does, then of course that's true. But, we can only carry on a discussion as mere mortals. If someone is arrested for a crime and brought before the courts, then most mortals would believe that person is more likely to be guilty. If JY is arrested and brought before the court, then as a mortal, I'd believe he's more likely to be guilty. And, so would the DA. After, that's why they are waiting correct? They want to make sure they can be as close as possible to convicting 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.

You lost me on that one. I thought you were the one arguing that just because a person was brought before the court didn't mean they are guilty. You seem to be arguing the opposite in that post.

I'm saying that the evidence will convict a person in a court of law but the guilt is there at the moment the crime is committed. Some people get away with it even though they are guilty but that does not make them innocent. That's my point.

[jerzeegirl]

Originally Posted by Reinya

Barbara2 is the one who says there is evidence to lead some to conclude Jason killed Michelle. I merely asked her what that evidence is since I'm not aware of it. I guess you're not aware of it either, huh?

we are not privy to all the info that LE has. Ive been following these cases on ctv/trutv since the SP case. Ive yet to see LE and DA as tight lipped as the ones in this case. No leaks, no nuttin. Just some SW's that LE has no control over their release to the public after time. I do believe if there was a mountain of evidence against him, he would be in jail right now but that doesnt mean that they dont have anything in those files, just not enough to make the DA feel that they could have a conviction BARD.

[gbmy]

Originally Posted by annalyzer

Uh, just because that jury found OJ not guilty does not mean he didn't murder Nicole and Ron.

That's right. It simply means that a jury of 12 had reasonable doubt. Listen, based on the logic you and barbara2 are using, there will never be true, certain, 100% justice for Michelle. Because after all, only God will ever know 'for sure'. But, I suppose atheists would argue that point to.

If Michelle's murderer is arrested and a jury convicts, then I will see that as justice for Michelle and her loved ones. I will not shortchange that justice by continuing to plant seeds of mortal doubt which would only take away from the feeling of closure that MY's loved ones want so bad right now.

[gbmy]

Originally Posted by Barbara2

You lost me on that one. I thought you were the one arguing that just because a person was brought before the court didn't mean they are guilty. You seem to be arguing the opposite in that post.

I'm saying that the evidence will convict a person in a court of law but the guilt is there at the moment the crime is committed. Some people get away with it even though they are guilty but that does not make them innocent. That's my point.

I understand and agree with your point. In fact, it's impossible for it to be false.