Luke Mitchell - Misinformation corrected.

[KenMair]

Stumbled upon an interesting comment last night on YT (admittedly not a bastion of accuracy, truthfulness or integrity). It was from a guy saying that LM was caught threatening another boy during his time at St Mary's Secure Facility in Bishopbriggs, where he allegedly yelled: "You'll get what she got!" ('she' being Jodi). Apparantely, it was a female member of staff -- now deceased -- that saw and heard the incident at St Mary's facility. According to the person making the claims on YT, the same female staffmember told a Hearing, under oath, about the incident and also 'spoke out against him' at the hearing for some of his behaviour when he was there (the Hearing took place in 2004, at the end of LM's time there).

Very interesting indeed. Any of you heard about this? I certainly could believe it (LM, by his own admission, has a short fuse), though perhaps this is confirmation bias on my part. Or, it could have been a facade or lie propagated by LM during his time there in order to try and get peace, and to avoid hassle or bullying by other youths there.

Certainly possible. I have heard that too from a very credible source but of course Luke's Army put their faith in Joe Steele who claims he's innocent or the misinterpreted quote from a traumatised granny.

Has it ever been mentioned he looks guilty? From the Sky TV shambles, to the growling at the graveside and the court appearances. He gives Goths a bad name.

[Nicholas]

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12406880.phone-record-of-jodi-murder-accused-wiped/
7 January 2005

"Both the inbox and outbox were empty, but the SIM card revealed a message received on the evening of Friday, June 27, 2003, saying: "Luke its Kim im at ma grans can u phone mi on (number) Love u xKimx" Another message on the SIM card at 10.41pm from Jodi's mother read: "2 wks grounding toad . . . Say bye 2 luke"."

The Herald reported the time of the text to be 10:41.  An earlier article from the same newspaper indicated that the time was 10:20.

Explain where Sandra Lean got her 10:38pm and 10:39pm timings for the 10:20pm text message

Killer Luke Mitchell made a phonecall from his mobile at 10:41pm and Sandra Lean had killer LM phoning Judith Jones at 10:40pm

http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2023/07/18/killer-luke-mitchell-comparing-timelines-facts-vs-the-murderer-his-mother-armchair-detective-scammer-sandra-leans-lies-around-timings/

[Chris_Halkides]

Elsewhere on the forum:
"At 2241 Judith Jones sent a text to the appellant's mobile phone, indicating that the deceased was again grounded. The appellant then telephoned Mrs Jones, informing her that he had not seen the deceased."

There was no text message from Judith to Luke at 10:20.  Whether the message was at 10:38 or 10:41 is a rabbit hole that is it is pointless to enter

[Nicholas]

Whether the message was at 10:38 or 10:41 is a rabbit hole that is it is pointless to enter

🙄

[Nicholas]

Elsewhere on the forum:

Answer the questions John

👇

Explain where scammer Sandra Lean got her 10:38pm and 10:39pm timings for the 10:20pm text message

Killer Luke Mitchell made a phonecall from his mobile at 10:41pm and Sandra Lean had killer LM phoning Judith Jones at 10:40pm

http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2023/07/18/killer-luke-mitchell-comparing-timelines-facts-vs-the-murderer-his-mother-armchair-detective-scammer-sandra-leans-lies-around-timings/

[Chris_Halkides]

https://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/mitchell-luke.htm
"At 2241 Judith Jones sent a text to the appellant's mobile phone, indicating that the deceased was again grounded."

This comes from Paragraph 11 of the 2008 appeal.  I see no reason to dispute the time of 22:41 (10:41 PM); in other words, I have no information in my possession to indicate a different time.

[Nicholas]

https://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/mitchell-luke.htm
"At 2241 Judith Jones sent a text to the appellant's mobile phone, indicating that the deceased was again grounded."

This comes from Paragraph 11 of the 2008 appeal.  I see no reason to dispute the time of 22:41 (10:41 PM); in other words, I have no information in my possession to indicate a different time.

Appeal judgements often contain fundamental errors

Already pointed out here
👇
http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2023/05/01/killer-luke-mitchell-troll-sandra-leans-lies-the-murderers-lies-regarding-the-1020pm-text-message-part-195/

Thr appeal judgement also has Janine Jones living at the wrong address in para 7

and repeated the fundamental error of killer Luke Mitchell’s evidence of a text at 10:41pm in paragraph 29

[Nicholas]

2008 appeal

The 2008 appeal judgement (para 159) also confirmed killer Luke Mitchell gave his permission for his clothing to be taken at the conclusion of his 22 page written witness statement

‘At the conclusion of the interview with the accused, which was not under caution and in respect of which evidence had been led without objection, he agreed to the taking of his clothes by the police and the examination of his person and the taking of a blood sample by a police surgeon

Page 253 from scammer Sandra Lean’s 2nd innocence fraud book,

‘There was no choice in the matter for him - the police took his phone from him, the police put him in a police car, the police told him they were taking him to the station, the police took his clothes and had him photographed, examined and swabbed and the police kept him there until almost 7am the following day.

And Corinne Mitchell’s own evidence during the trial was that killer Luke Mitchell gave his mobile phone to the police so that they could talk to his mother Corinne Mitchell after he allegedly telephoned her a second time and he told her “I can’t talk, I have to go”

Corinne Mitchell:
“He would not answer and then he finally phoned and said, 'I can't talk, I have to go.' He phoned back again and when I asked what happened he said, ‘I can't tell you’, I heard a man's voice in the background and Luke said it was a policeman and I asked to speak to him

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/I+DIDN%27T+HELP+TO+COVER+UP+JODI+MURDER%3B+Denial+by+mother.-a0127122253

[Nicholas]

The Herald reported the time of the text to be 10:41.  An earlier article from the same newspaper indicated that the time was 10:20.

Neil MacKay was working for the Herald at the time

https://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/2018/news/editor-quits-newspaper-due-to-ill-health-but-will-keep-writing-for-title/

Do you know who from the Herald attended killer Luke Mitchell’s trial and when and where they got their content from when they didn’t attend the trial?

Neil MacKay - 21st February 2021
“AROUND 10pm on the night of the murder, the family of Jodi Jones, worried that she hadn’t been seen since 5pm, arranged a search party. Luke Mitchell took part in the search with his pet dog, meeting up with Jodi’s family.

“Reporters camped out at the Mitchell home.

Was Neil MacKay one of the reporters who “camped out at the Mitchell home” or the Jones’ home?

“I was told Mitchell was definitely guilty. In all my years as a reporter –covering some of the most serious crimes in recent British criminal history, including major terrorist offences – I’ve never received such a phone call from police. A lot of the telephone conversation centred on Mitchell’s love of Goth music and his alternative lifestyle.

“At the time, there was a moral panic around teenagers listening to music their parents found disagreeable. I wondered at the time if part of the Mitchell case was “the prosecution of a lifestyle”.

As a reporter, I later visited Mitchell in jail, and spoke with his mother.
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/19106402.murder-small-town-luke-mitchell-innocent-murder-jodi-jones/

[faithlilly]

Appeal judgements often contain fundamental errors

Already pointed out here
👇
http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2023/05/01/killer-luke-mitchell-troll-sandra-leans-lies-the-murderers-lies-regarding-the-1020pm-text-message-part-195/

Thr appeal judgement also has Janine Jones living at the wrong address in para 7

and repeated the fundamental error of killer Luke Mitchell’s evidence of a text at 10:41pm in paragraph 29

So all the media at the time of the trial, excluding the Herald although they subsequently changed the time to 10.41, and the Appeal Court got it wrong yet you, with one source, think you’ve got it right. Why?

[Mr Apples]

It is possible Jodi had found out about the relationship. On the afternoon of Monday, June 30, schoolfriends remember her seeming upset in her class, her head down on her desk.

^ I knew I'd read it somewhere official and not just on another public internet forum (I've provided a link below of the full Herald article from where the excerpt is from; it contains some quite interesting info about the case and I'd urge you all to read it). It would be interesting to see the witness statements pertaining to this and if it was discussed in court. It also ties in nicely with what Jodi's best friend Kirsten Ford said to a newspaper at court when the guilty verdict came through (ie, that Jodi seemed quieter than usual that day in school; link to article is also provided below), and also ties in nicely with what I'd read on another forum about Jodi having had an argument in school that day and them being spotted, uncharacteristically, with their backs to one another in the China gardens  (I don't  have a cite for this, but I definitely read it on one of the other internet forums.

The crux of this post is to highlight, yet again, that the circumstantial evidence against LM was of glacial proportions; the more you read,  the more uncomfortable one feels about LM's involvement. It seems to me that something wasn't right with Jodi that day, and it seems logical to me that whatever happened between them at school, it continued at 1655 when they met up at the Easthouses end of RDP and LM snapped and killed her behind that wall in a fit of unalloyed rage (don't think it was premeditated). And,  I don't think it matters if she seemed happy before she left the house at 1650 . . . I think her happiness at having her curfew lifted prematurely made her forget about what happened earlier in school and made her more positive at that time.

 
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12401673.a-truly-evil-murder-you-will-rightly-be-regarded-as-wicked-lucy-bannerman-finds-how-a-teenage-love-of-music-and-rebellion-ended-with-a-walk-to-a-horrific-death/

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/JODI+JONES%3A+HER+SOULMATES+My+Luke+has+all+these+knives+in+his...-a0127512558

[Chris_Halkides]

I think her happiness at having her curfew lifted prematurely made her forget about what happened earlier in school and made her more positive at that time.

 
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12401673.a-truly-evil-murder-you-will-rightly-be-regarded-as-wicked-lucy-bannerman-finds-how-a-teenage-love-of-music-and-rebellion-ended-with-a-walk-to-a-horrific-death/

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/JODI+JONES%3A+HER+SOULMATES+My+Luke+has+all+these+knives+in+his...-a0127512558

Purely for the sake of argument, let us assume that Luke was cheating on her.  Why would she be happy to meet him?  Why wouldn't she go find some other people to hang out with?  Beyond that, his cheating might conceivably be a motive for her to kill him, but not vice versa.  The circumstantial case against Luke Mitchell, especially the portions of it which involve eyewitnesses, is a hot, sticky mess.

[faithlilly]

It is possible Jodi had found out about the relationship. On the afternoon of Monday, June 30, schoolfriends remember her seeming upset in her class, her head down on her desk.

^ I knew I'd read it somewhere official and not just on another public internet forum (I've provided a link below of the full Herald article from where the excerpt is from; it contains some quite interesting info about the case and I'd urge you all to read it). It would be interesting to see the witness statements pertaining to this and if it was discussed in court. It also ties in nicely with what Jodi's best friend Kirsten Ford said to a newspaper at court when the guilty verdict came through (ie, that Jodi seemed quieter than usual that day in school; link to article is also provided below), and also ties in nicely with what I'd read on another forum about Jodi having had an argument in school that day and them being spotted, uncharacteristically, with their backs to one another in the China gardens  (I don't  have a cite for this, but I definitely read it on one of the other internet forums.

The crux of this post is to highlight, yet again, that the circumstantial evidence against LM was of glacial proportions; the more you read,  the more uncomfortable one feels about LM's involvement. It seems to me that something wasn't right with Jodi that day, and it seems logical to me that whatever happened between them at school, it continued at 1655 when they met up at the Easthouses end of RDP and LM snapped and killed her behind that wall in a fit of unalloyed rage (don't think it was premeditated). And,  I don't think it matters if she seemed happy before she left the house at 1650 . . . I think her happiness at having her curfew lifted prematurely made her forget about what happened earlier in school and made her more positive at that time.

 
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12401673.a-truly-evil-murder-you-will-rightly-be-regarded-as-wicked-lucy-bannerman-finds-how-a-teenage-love-of-music-and-rebellion-ended-with-a-walk-to-a-horrific-death/

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/JODI+JONES%3A+HER+SOULMATES+My+Luke+has+all+these+knives+in+his...-a0127512558

Is this the part you’re talking about?

“ It is possible Jodi had found out about the relationship. On the afternoon of Monday, June 30, schoolfriends remember her seeming upset in her class, her head down on her desk.”

What school friends?

This is why Luke didn’t have the chance of a fair trial. People really do believe everything they read.

And Kirsten…Jodi’s best friend? The girl who had signed an exclusive with a newspaper before the trial was even over. Why else do you think that the newspaper was with her when the verdict came through? It’s called protecting your exclusive. Further do you think any tabloid would pay top dollar for ‘Luke and Jodi were a lovely couple who got on fantastically’ ?

[KenMair]

Further do you think any tabloid would pay top dollar for ‘Luke and Jodi were a lovely couple who got on fantastically’ ?

You really think the tabloids are to blame for the trial verdict? SO much was unreported, like LM piqueing Jodi on the leg with his knife at a party a few weeks before. Normal behaviour for most 14 year olds in your eyes. They had only been "dating" for a few months and he was still in regular contact with KT plus KVN from the cadets, and at the same time had told friends about how he wanted to slit someone's throat, all the time using huge amounts of cannabis.

[Nicholas]

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12401673.a-truly-evil-murder-you-will-rightly-be-regarded-as-wicked-lucy-bannerman-finds-how-a-teenage-love-of-music-and-rebellion-ended-with-a-walk-to-a-horrific-death/

It appears a lot of the content from the above article came directly from the 42 day trial evidence