Let Me Count the Ways of the People Who Heard One Boy Brag About Killing Someone

[Bryan]

Tweet

I read somewhere while wondering around the media dispatches that Josh Young had allegedly told six people about the Trey Zwicker's killing. Let us count the people he told, bearing in mind the low standing of these people in relation to the boy. Six people would make it onto the following list:

1. Josh Gouker
2. Jahira Riddle
3. Cassie Gouker
4. John Robertson, Cassie's boyfriend?
5 and 6. Unknown but could include a number of interesting suspects including one unknown woman, the kidnapping victim from Alabama and possibly Gouker's mother, Ruby Jessie.

This is a interesting lineup of people with low reputations with some exceptions for Ms. Ruby, whose switching around in loyalities matches her change love or hate of her own son.

Ms. Ruby, Gouker's mother and Young's grandson is the weakest link. Her parenting, along with her husband's if he was around, is the reason Josh Gouker was the man he is today. Their lack of control of their son got Gouker embroiled in the legal system from an early age. She allowed him to run wild with all sorts of women and all sorts of not-so-cheap thrills to the point he really ran afoul with the law, drawing up to the major crim that locked him up for most of the 2000's, the crimes outside that bar, c. 2002. (The system obviously did not charge Gouker with any sex crimes over the years, despite the number of ladies he laid over the years. Some of the ladies may have been under the influence of some drug and/or were forced into a sex act. They may had filed a sex charge against Gouker. If they did, Gouker would have to register as a sex offender, thus preventing him from gaining custody or even visitation of any offspring.)

Gouker's main fault as a teen was to knock up Angelica Young, Josh's mom, who was around the same age as Gouker at the time she was made pregnant. Same minds act alike. Ms. Young had a bad rap sheet with social services and the cops, otherwise the system would never had intervened when her child rearing was brought into question. Ms. Young could not stay clean no matter how many times she was given to be a normal person. Her death in Apr. 2010 was too inconvenient to Josh Young, but not to his old man.

Remember that Gouker was locked up at the time Ms. Young died. He found out from one of his relations, maybe Cassie but also perhaps his old lady, Ruby Jessie, so that was when Gouker may had concocted his future plans to frame his son for something. I do not think he may had any ideas at first, but that other lady in his life, Ms. Amanda Campbell, gave him a perfect plan even he did not think of it himself.

Remember that Little Josh Young was in foster care by the fall of 2010 when Gouker, just released on parole, petitioned the court to gain sole custody of his son. Even if he had a criminal record that involved gang activity, assault and battery, suspected crimes against  many women and other accusations from different states, Gouker had a really good excuse to get the family court judge to gloss over that rap sheet. He had by this time made up with Amanda and "married" her. He sort of "adopted" both of her kids. Though this woman had upset him over abortions of two pregnancies and hung out with another man who she carried the two kids she had, this was all forgiven. So this cover story won him unjustly his son. It was as if the state agency (the court) did not listen to what the other state agency (childrens' services) had to say in objection to this case. Thus the judge in this custody case made the worst ruling of her life, setting up a child for gross abuse and then further abuse by the legal system.

Gouker knew how to toy with the system until he got what he wanted. The failure of six or seven different states in coordinating their desires for Josh Gouker proved that Gouker was above the law. He could do what he wanted by manipulating the very people who hung around him from gang members to law enforcement to prosecutors.

When he won sole custody of his son in March of 2011, it was the Grand Prize for the coup de grace that he wanted to do to Ms. Amanda Campbell. She was real target of his wrath. I had thought of her as the very lynchpin of the entire case. How would she be so intimidated to the point of dependence on this big brute of a man? How could she find the time to flee him with her daughter, file a restraining order and then not telling the law about the murder of her own son right in front of her? Why is she allowing a innocent boy to be screwed for that murder, even though he had no involvement in that murder? If she wanted justice to put its full weight on Josh Gouker, she should not stood idly by while Gouker then accused Little Josh for this crime. My thoery is that Ms. Campbell is so afraid of Gouker and his people that she does not want to mark all of her family for death. If Gouker can kill her son in cold blood, how would it not stop him for getting someone to murder her. Her silence equals life for her and her daughter.

The question for her is this: is it worth it for a boy to be falsely accused for your son's murder because he is the son of the real killer? It is not worth his life for your family's life. Tell the law what really happened. Put Joshua Gouker away for this crime. You know he killed your son, not Josh Young, a kid with no criminal history. If you fear for your life or for the life of your daughter or others in your tight circle, allow the system to take care of those creeps. They may have failed you some other times, but with the publicity in this case, Gouker would have to think twice before ordering your death, for any murder will come back to him. It would also prove the real innocence of the child now falsely accused. Do the system a favor and tell the truth of that night last year. The truth may hurt, but it hurts Joshua Young every day he is locked up in juvenile hall for what he did not do that night. You know he is innocent. For the love of the Lord Jesus Christ, tell the truth of that night. Put Josh Gouker out of your life for good. Make him squirm, make excuses and beg for his life to be spared from wearing a red jumpsuit and make the long walk to his fate. Make him suffer like he made you suffer. It is the right thing to do. It is the only thing to do.

This court system is going to hear the drumroll of innocence this fall. I like to see justice be done or the stars fall down to earth. The state must learn they cannot jump to conclusions just because some convicted felon said the sky was falling. However the sky is not falling. The system is falling for a lie. It is time to let lying dogs to be put in their place. I hope more pressure is put on this system for this gross injustice. I hope Tom Wine has more common sense to free this boy instead of letting his predesessor, Dave Stengel, think he was doing the right thing. It is Tom Wine's case now. Let him see the mistakes in this case and drop it from going to trial. This case is a waste of taxpayer dollars, since it only is going to come back with a vote of "not guilty". If not, then his lawyers are bad people that need to be culled from the practice of law in this country, along with the cops who made up this case. They all need to be blamed for framing an innocent boy. Tom Wine would be drug into this to if he allows this kid to stand trial.

[Melissa]

Tweet

It's possible Gouker convinced Josh to make the statement that he committed the murder. Either out of loyalty or to protect his father from being charged. The easiest way to ensure someone won't turn on you is to make them culpable in some way (disposing of evidence perhaps) or have them assume responsibility for one or more elements of the crime - possibly by vocalizing guilt to family members. Josh Young wanted to please his father. He loved him. I could see how he might be susceptible to believing anything his father might have told him.

When you think about it, it would make sense that if Gouker committed the crime he made sure anyone who might have known about it was not in a position to turn it on him.

What is intriguing to me is no one really pressed little Josh for details. Assuming he really did make the statement he killed Trey, no one asked him how or required him to provide the kind of details that would make such a confession credible. That seems odd to me because if someone told me they killed someone I would want to know why and how.

[Bryan]

Tweet

Any sort of statement of guilt could be thrown out by the old statement, "I was bullied by my old man." The animals Gouker killed is quite a bad sign. So is the manipulation of every key "witness" in this case. Each of the accusers have vile criminal record that will be used against them to show the court that their criminal backgrounds prove they cannot be proven to tell the truth. DNA evidence that ties someone else to the crime would be even more clear that Gouker and company are liars. The law is just as guilty of false arrest, jailing and prosecution of Josh Young instead of finding the truth of the death.

The father of the victim should be angry at the system but he should not blame the wrong persons for his son's murder. I wonder if he would even buy Gouker being the sole killer in this case, even if the proof is there in front of him. He had no common sense realizing that he was concerned about his kids living in the same house of Gouker. The custody proceedings were out the window by the spring of 2011.

Now I know Gouker was real killer. The motive was revenge against Amanda, the boy's mother for something she did that made Gouker mad, the abortions, He had planned for some sort of revenge and planned to make his son the fall guy of any crime he committed to avenge the wrongs he suffered.

After he killed Trey, Gouker had doubt about the seriousness of this crime. He did not want to kill anyone, but it occurred, He had to keep the law from finding out. So it was the animal and human abuse at first. When Gouker thought Det. Russ was getting ideas about himn, thanks to Amanda's strong actions, he fled with Little Josh. He wanted Josh involved in some crimes so he was put away in a jail cell for a long time, hence the kidnapping. When Alabama and Kentucky prosecutors refused to charge Little Josh and the latter not wanting to have anything to do with his dad anymore, that was when Gouker and company lied en masse to provoke the false charges.

The cops and the prosecutors are so gullible to fall for this big lie as it was the gospel truth. However, once one adds the criminal records of the accusers, then their credibility collapses like a house of cards. I highly suggest the defense use this against the witnesses to wreck them in the eyes of judge and jury. Only defeat of the prosecution case Josh Gouker get an extended stay in the clink with the possibility he could join thirty-seven other people in red jumpsuit, waiting for their turn for the death chamber. We must free Josh Young and make sure Josh Gouker is charged with the same charges, with perjury, obstruction of justice and intimidating witnesses added as a Christmas gift that keeps on giving.

Perjury: Gouker obviously has lied and sent his son to jail for a crime the boy did not do.

Obstuction: Usually reserved for disgraced public officials, private citizens can face this too. Gouker deceived a whole lot of people, preventing the  prosecution charging him. Gouker planned this crime all along.

witness tampering: it was said that Gouker has a stong power over all of his ladies. To get other to lie for him so he would not hurt and kill them too is proof enough.

First degree murder: Gouker killed in cold blood and planned to do something to Amanda, his ex.

[Bryan]

Tweet

Sometimes I wonder why I waste so much of my time with these cases. If the police and the prosecutors in this case is so convinced that Josh Young is the guilty party, why would they base it on people with criminal histories? One of them has to be hiding the truth. One of them had to have done the crime. So how can these people continue to defy logic when so much evidence points to "actual innoence" not "obvious guilt" in the accused sitting at the defense table.

Not to sound like a broken record, we know Josh Gouker planned this case from the snatching of his son to the beating death of Trey Zwicker to the flee and eluding when he believed police were close to arresting him (Big Josh) for the crime. He knew about the Indiana case, it was so closely timed, just like the restraining order against him, even though Amanda could have picked him off with arrest. It was all deceit and fun for Josh Gouker. He knew how to manipulate the system just as a rogue cop. He had so much training from the good ones while locked up. The guy should be given a graduate degree and a red jumpsut for his troubles. Thirty-seven other doctors will be glad to have his company, so to speak.

However this is now about the the people who believed this ingrates. I suspect that they were so pressured for a judgement from Trey's family and from a community supposedly effected by this murder, though it is all too common in a big city, it is rare for the victim to be fourteen. However, the cops and prosecutor forgot in their rush to judgement the age of the suspect (fifteen). They even did not look at the physical evidence, which may suggest that a bigger person could have made the blows that killed the boy.

This is why I concluded that the murder occurred in the parking lot of the alternative high school and Gouker dumped the body in the wooded area nearby to make it appear the fatal assult took place there. He then got Cassie and her boyfriend to ditch the evidence. Finally he spent the rest of the month harassing Little Josh and the rest of the family, who when the murder occurred, knew Big Josh did the crime.

The weak spots in this case is Cassie and Gouker's mom. Cassie actually said more than once in a taped jailhouse phone call "you did it, right?" Gouker actually told his mom that he killed Trey, but had her life threatened somehow so now not telling anyone that part, so how can such people be thought of as "good" in such cases.

Then there is the possible DNA evidence. I have a good feeling of this finally blowing the case up, though it is possible both prosecution and defense experts would be split down the middle about if it was Little Josh or Big Josh as the one who killed Trey. The opinion here is that DNA would be similar between father and son that one party would confuse the evidence and that may as well be the prosecution. Even if the DNA cannot rule out both people, the subtile differences between parents and their offsprings will make such evidence clear that Gouker cannot be eliminated while Young can be ruled out, since Gouker would have that subtile differnece that will mean he will be the one facing murder one by the time this is over.

Let's hope that Gouker does not do what Richard Tuitt's defense counsel tried to do to Michael Crowe, drag him threw the mud again, saying that Gouker was the innocent party. One would be a fool to think Gouker would do this to force his son back on the stand for another grilling from the defense when trial comes, but it did not stop justice from freeing that creep and it would not free Gouker. It could enhance the expected guilty vertict even more. A juror may tell a future reporter that, "the accused had the gull to accuse his own son for the murder, that told me Mr. Gouker was guilty as sin". This is why Michael Crowe had to go to court again with his two friends to finally clear their names. I just hope once free and Gouker tried and convicted that Josh Young does not have to do the same thing fourteen years later.

I just hope the charges are thrown out and Gouker charged. To not do so is a vast waste of taxpayer money. Tom Wine better erase this mistake in order to prove to voters that Dave Stengel was the scum of the earth. If not, then he can just join Stengel and the assistant prosecutors in this case (along with the cops) with free membership the "scum of the earth" club. Believe me, Johnny Bongivengo and Angela Corey are already card-carrying members.

[Melissa]

Tweet

It's disturbing that Gouker used a bat to kill one of the family pets. A bat, of all things.

[Bryan]

Tweet

Gouker's motive for killing Trey Zwicker and then blaming his son for the murder is as clear as the murder weapon, a bat. Alas two different bats were used in both crimes, since Cassie and John got rid of the evidence the night of the tenth/eleventh of May 2011.

This is why I concluded that Big Josh committed the crime in the parking lot outside the high school. It was where he and Amanda caught up with Trey that night. When Trey refused to come home, Gouker would obviously turn violent. Trey originally had the bat, since Gouker did not have the bat when he confronted the boy. Gouker used his bigger size and brute strength to obtain the bat forcefully from the boy. Trey turned in fright to run from Gouker. The man though was too quick, making hard contact with the back of the boy's head, which accounted for that in the autoposy. The boy fell to the ground, what position is not known, but the blows were all over the upper part of Trey's body, with evidence of defensive wounds. Gouker kept on beating on the kid until he was not moving. Gouker then picked up the boy and dumped him where the kids would find him over twelve hours after the crime.

The police were confused by the inability to pinpoint where the attack actually occurred but I have to conclude that the area the body was found was the dump site, not where the attack occurred, but all signs of a attack in the parking lot or thereabouts disappeared with the passage of time.

But back to the killing of pets, Gouker did all he could over the next month to manipulate Amanda (hence she is by his side from the killing to the time the body was found) and the rest of his housemates. When he suspected the law closing in on him despite his blame of other people to the cops, Gouker killed something or beat somebody up. (Amanda turned out to the frequent target. Have to keep the mother quiet for she saw who killed her son.)

Then Amanda left, but did not for once turn Gouker's happy ass in for fear of her life, despite the possibility to be protected by the state for her evidence in Trey's death. Though she is an eyewitness perhaps to the killing, who says she is not, she somehow cannot say the words that would put Gouker behind bars and free his son. It is if she created a hatred both for Gouker and his son at the same time, thinking this would keep her family safe from Gouker and his gang. Though all it does is keep a boy in jail, possibly for the rest of his life and Gouker facing the day he will be out again. It defies all possible logic. If she wants to be safe, Amanda should tell the cops the truth. That would keep Gouker away and put fear in his gang that any revenge will not go well for them or their mentor. Why Amanda cannot goes beyond shock and into her survival. But she cannot survive the rage of her family against her when Josh Young is found innocent. She could have put Gouker away forever, but she chose to do the wrong thing out of some childish preservation of her shattered innocence.

I have hardly heard any news of this case for weeks now, Why is there not any move to throw this case out before it ruins Tom Wine just like it ruined Dave Stengel? Why are the cops and prosecutors still acting on the wrong conclusions when all the evidence points at Gouker? What part of Cassie's statement of guilt don't they understand? It is time these people get their heads out of the air and see the forest again. This must end with the boy free and Gouker in prison with life without parole: the very sentence he wanted his son to get. Gouker must die in prison. Young must live his life in freedom.

[Melissa]

Tweet

The trial is in October, unless something changes.

[Bryan]

Tweet

I am still in deep thought over this. Any sane person in a legal setting would not even get far as a trial. If I was the defense attorney, I am circling the calendar for a smackdown of enormous proportions. Only a moron would believe the wild stories of these known felons or potential felons over a boy with nary a blimish on his record. Even the victim's family will have to acknowledge that they were lied to by these people.

Funny thing is the fools in the law enforcement and law prosecution part of it, wasting millions of dollars just because some convicts lie to them and they fell for it. They should prepare for the political blowback this case will have on their lives. If I were them, I prepare the warrents now, for when they realize they were lied to, Gouker's goose is cooked just in time to spent the holidays, much less natural life in a cage with concrete and iron bars with a bigger guy named John, who may have a thing for big dudes like him. The law may have a way of denying the truth, but in some cases, the snitches often are the ones that pay for their falsehoods. (The logic by the time he is found out is "if he lied about the murder, then he did it or knew exactly who did it".)

Remember that Gouker plotted to frame his son from the day he filed the petition to gain sole custody of his boy. He just did not know who he was going to kill someone close to make that happen. I have a feeling Gouker killed Trey out of sudden rage that night. He did not plot to frame the boy for this crime until he did have control over his son anymore. He, Ms. Riddle and Ms. Cassie gave the detective a story so big, that he, stumped by the case for over a month just used it to jump to an arrest. That "interview" afterwards where the boy denied Gouker's tall tale only warped the story even more, since Mr. Young tried to tell the truth when earlier, when under the noose of Gouker, he could not. However since Det. Russ believed the crooks this time, he made the boy into a scapegoat.

It does not have to end a full-blown trial. It all could have been solved if the cops used a little bit of common sense with the heresay and innuendo of the adults to know that Gouker was using them to get what he wanted: his son out of the way and he free as a bird when parole comes up.

I hate to burst your hope bubble, Gouker, but in 2013 and then until the day you die, your behind is going to stay in that penal institution. You will be found out. Your confederates will be lucky to escape conspiracy charges in exchange to testify against you at your trial. You are not going to erase the shame of your youth so easily. Your son must be free to live out his life away from the likes of you.