Who Confessed to the Murder?

[Nicholas]

Mr Ovens statements "I told Luke, Jodi had already left to meet him"

Common sense yet again. This is an ordinary evening, his daughter had left a short while ago to meet with her boyfriend. The boyfriend phones and is told she had already left to meet him. It's early evening in summertime. The family go about their evening, probably not given this a second thought, why would they? There is no phone call back, natural assumption that the pair had met. They couldn't phone Jodi to let her know Luke had phoned as Jodi did not have a phone.

Another area of suspicion upon Luke, whilst it is feasible that a teenager may delete her personal message to her boyfriend, having used her mothers phone, why would Luke have completely deleted everything from his? Not so feasible? Who was Luke worried about that may read them?

It gets to this girls curfew time, It appears JuJ gives her daughter some leeway here, gets to over half an hour of being late and she is annoyed at her daughter, first day of all her punishments being lifted and she stays out later than she should. She texted Luke's phone "Right Toad get home, you're grounded"

As soon as this mother realises her daughter has not been with Luke - she is frantic. How do we know this, as by 10.50pm she is phoning the police. This speaks volumes to me. It shows clearly that this girl was not in the habit of not being or doing what she had set out to do - on this occasion it was to meet with Luke.

We have Luke, who tells his friend that "Jodi is not coming out" Who told this girls mother that he thought "she had grounded her again" Who claimed himself that he was waiting around for nearly two hours on her turning up? Who knew she was not supposed to use this path alone, and even if he did think she was walking this path alone, he did nothing. By his account, she did not turn up, she was to be walking this path. He did not phone back to see where she was.

Yet again, clear, precise reasons as to why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated from the investigation.

Luke slipped up (Again) when he said to JuJ he thought she’d been grounded - especially after AO had told him a few hours before Jodi had left the house

I wonder if Corrine called him an ‘idiot’ for slipping up like this? like when she said to James English he’d have to be an idiot to turn right

[Mr Apples]

If Mia needed a pee couldn’t Corrine have let her go for one in the back garden?

I’ve asked myself the same question. However, maybe it was more of a last walk, rather than last pee. Don’t know who was responsible for taking the dog for walks and what the family’s normal routine was as regards dog walking, but bear in mind the schools had finished up for the summer holidays on 30.06.03, so it was lighter nights and Luke’s schedule had probably changed and had more free rein to do as he pleased (he already was a bit of the man about the house, given his parents split up when he was 11 and CM already had let him do as he pleased more than most teenagers would). Perhaps Sandra Lean’s book goes into more detail about these particular issues.

[Parky41]

Sandra Lean
‘The problem with the V point is how many people had been through it by the time the forensics officers got there. For example, blood on a boulder at the path side of the V was considered incapable of providing any usable evidence because it could have been deposited there by police officers at the scene. The explanation for no trace of Jodi going through the V was the same, but it's odd that there was no trace of the wall on Jodi either. I've been through the V point many times and every time, I get "scuff marks" of some description on my jeans.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451974.html#msg451974

Luke was taken straight to the police station from the crime scene - so why wasn’t blood found on his footwear?

"but it's odd that there was no trace of the wall on Jodi either"


Firstly - shows clearly perhaps that Jodi entered the woodland with Luke via their usual hangout place, that she most certainly did not go over this V.  Remember here that LM denied ever frequenting this woodland. Until the tree was produced as evidence with their initials carved into it (with a sharp blade) Then denied having ever ventured further into it -  Along of course with denying that he had not known of the existence of this V at all, until that evening? - really? You can not miss it.

Secondly - the blunt force trauma to this girls head, Whilst getting hit with a heavy branch of a tree may not leave residue, a dry stone dyke is something else, chalk etc. Ms Leans futile claims of the trauma being caused by the wall?

And not forgetting the bloody spray - "once again we are left with the real possibility that Jodi was murdered elsewhere" - ???

[Nicholas]

"but it's odd that there was no trace of the wall on Jodi either"


Firstly - shows clearly perhaps that Jodi entered the woodland with Luke via their usual hangout place, that she most certainly did not go over this V.  Remember here that LM denied ever frequenting this woodland. Until the tree was produces as evidence with their initials carved into it (with a sharp blade) The denied having ever ventured further into it - think we something with bells on here? Along of course with denying that he had known of the existence of this V at all, until that evening? - really? You can not miss it.

Secondly - the blunt force trauma to, Whilst getting hit with a heavy branch of a tree may not leave residue, a dry stone dyke is something else, chalk etc. Ms Leans futile claims of the trauma being caused by the wall?

And not forgetting the bloody spray - "once again we are left with the real possibility that Jodi was murdered elsewhere" - ???

Photo of Luke Mitchell’s wood carving here ⬇️
https://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/mitchell-luke-photos.htm

[Nicholas]

If Corrine didn’t want Luke ‘negotiating stairs whilst he was on heavy medication’ how did the numerous bottles of urine end up in his bedroom?

Corrine Mitchell
‘Luke was on very very strong medication because obviously he was totally traumatised by this time the press were vile the police were vile and in our living room we had two big couches I mean really big couches so I’m like right you sleep on that one I’ll sleep on that one I didn’t want him negotiating stairs under heavy medication because he would have tumbled back down and I wanted to keep an eye on him 

[Nicholas]

Mr Ovens statements "I told Luke, Jodi had already left to meet him"

Common sense yet again. This is an ordinary evening, his daughter had left a short while ago to meet with her boyfriend. The boyfriend phones and is told she had already left to meet him. It's early evening in summertime. The family go about their evening, probably not given this a second thought, why would they? There is no phone call back, natural assumption that the pair had met. They couldn't phone Jodi to let her know Luke had phoned as Jodi did not have a phone.

Another area of suspicion upon Luke, whilst it is feasible that a teenager may delete her personal message to her boyfriend, having used her mothers phone, why would Luke have completely deleted everything from his? Not so feasible? Who was Luke worried about that may read them?

It gets to this girls curfew time, It appears JuJ gives her daughter some leeway here, gets to over half an hour of being late and she is annoyed at her daughter, first day of all her punishments being lifted and she stays out later than she should. She texted Luke's phone "Right Toad get home, you're grounded"

As soon as this mother realises her daughter has not been with Luke - she is frantic. How do we know this, as by 10.50pm she is phoning the police. This speaks volumes to me. It shows clearly that this girl was not in the habit of not being or doing what she had set out to do - on this occasion it was to meet with Luke.

We have Luke, who tells his friend that "Jodi is not coming out" Who told this girls mother that he thought "she had grounded her again"  Who claimed himself that he was waiting around for nearly two hours on her turning up? Who knew she was not supposed to use this path alone, and even if he did think she was walking this path alone, he did nothing. By his account, she did not turn up, she was to be walking this path. He did not phone back to see where she was.

Yet again, clear, precise reasons as to why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated from the investigation.

And why did Luke apparently phone his mum to see if Jodi had been to their house but not phone JuJ or AO back?

[Mr Apples]

Mr Ovens statements "I told Luke, Jodi had already left to meet him"

Common sense yet again. This is an ordinary evening, his daughter had left a short while ago to meet with her boyfriend. The boyfriend phones and is told she had already left to meet him. It's early evening in summertime. The family go about their evening, probably not given this a second thought, why would they? There is no phone call back, natural assumption that the pair had met. They couldn't phone Jodi to let her know Luke had phoned as Jodi did not have a phone.

Another area of suspicion upon Luke, whilst it is feasible that a teenager may delete her personal message to her boyfriend, having used her mothers phone, why would Luke have completely deleted everything from his? Not so feasible? Who was Luke worried about that may read them?

It gets to this girls curfew time, It appears JuJ gives her daughter some leeway here, gets to over half an hour of being late and she is annoyed at her daughter, first day of all her punishments being lifted and she stays out later than she should. She texted Luke's phone "Right Toad get home, you're grounded"

As soon as this mother realises her daughter has not been with Luke - she is frantic. How do we know this, as by 10.50pm she is phoning the police. This speaks volumes to me. It shows clearly that this girl was not in the habit of not being or doing what she had set out to do - on this occasion it was to meet with Luke.

We have Luke, who tells his friend that "Jodi is not coming out" Who told this girls mother that he thought "she had grounded her again"  Who claimed himself that he was waiting around for nearly two hours on her turning up? Who knew she was not supposed to use this path alone, and even if he did think she was walking this path alone, he did nothing. By his account, she did not turn up, she was to be walking this path. He did not phone back to see where she was.

Yet again, clear, precise reasons as to why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated from the investigation.

Yes, no doubt . And when you consider that Luke’s own brother couldn’t give him an alibi for his whereabouts between 1640 and 1745, then it becomes even more incrimnating (especially as he said in his initial statement on 03.07.03 that he didn’t think he saw Luke in the house @ 1640 when he got home, but changed it on 07.07.03 to say he did see Luke; it’s interesting to note that he changed it after consulting with his mum, CM, who gave a statement on 06.07.03). However, incriminating as all that may be, it can all equally be explained away by theory to counter any of these arguments (we know the counter-arguments; I don’t have the time to list them all!). Shane’s testimony is a real stumbling block for me. It’s been suggested that the FLO tried to put words into his mouth and would never believe anything he said. Likewise, when the police interviewed him they often interviewed him forcefully, much in the same manner as Luke was. I think Shane had some memory loss issues which were the result of drug abuse (was the extent of his memory loss ever questioned? was Sm even a reliable witness? I guess the the fact that he was working full time as a car mechanic at the time suggests he was).

[Mr Apples]

Couple of questions:

When was that carving on the tree found? Was it done after Jodi was murdered? Can it be proven that it was done prior to the murder?

[faithlilly]

The CoA states at para 11,

“Ovens informed Judith Jones about this call” but doesn’t give a time of when he did so

From the context it appears she was told soon after.

‘ [11] The appellant telephoned the deceased's house at 1732, but received no reply. At 1740 he called again, and spoke to Alan Ovens, asking if the deceased was in. He was informed that she had left to meet him. He replied, "OK, cool". Ovens informed Judith Jones about this call’

So both AO and JuJ knew that Jodi wasn’t with Luke 40-50 minutes after she had left the house yet it didn’t raise alarm bells with them and they didn’t phone Luke again to check that she had got there.

Why was it thought suspicious that Luke, a young boy, failed to chase up what had happened to Jodi when her parents, the adults, didn't?

Double standards?

[Nicholas]

Yes, no doubt . And when you consider that Luke’s own brother couldn’t give him an alibi for his whereabouts between 1640 and 1745, then it becomes even more incrimnating (especially as he said in his initial statement on 03.07.03 that he didn’t think he saw Luke in the house @ 1640 when he got home, but changed it on 07.07.03 to say he did see Luke; it’s interesting to note that he changed it after consulting with his mum, CM, who gave a statement on 06.07.03). However, incriminating as all that may be, it can all equally be explained away by theory to counter any of these arguments (we know the counter-arguments; I don’t have the time to list them all!). Shane’s testimony is a real stumbling block for me. It’s been suggested that the FLO tried to put words into his mouth and would never believe anything he said. Likewise, when the police interviewed him they often interviewed him forcefully, much in the same manner as Luke was. I think Shane had some memory loss issues which were the result of drug abuse (was the extent of his memory loss ever questioned? was Sm even a reliable witness? I guess the the fact that he was working full time as a car mechanic at the time suggests he was).

Shane appears to have attempted to use alleged ‘memory loss issues’ as a result of ‘drug abuse’ but he may have abused drugs following the murder?
Do we have more details on Shane’s history of ‘drug abuse’ - of the types of drugs he was abusing and when?

[Nicholas]

Couple of questions:

When was that carving on the tree found? Was it done after Jodi was murdered? Can it be proven that it was done prior to the murder?

Wasn’t the photo of the tree carving a trial exhibit ?

Photo of Luke Mitchell’s wood carving here ⬇️
https://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/mitchell-luke-photos.htm

‘The jury of eight men and seven women are shown photographs taken on and around the Roan's Dyke pathway in Dalkeith, where Jodi's body was discovered.
Among the pictures is one of a tree with the initials 'LM' carved above the initials '[Name removed]'.
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/THE+JODI+JONES+TRIAL%3A+A+silent+witness.-a0124614173


‘On Thursday, the jury was shown a series of photographs taken in the Roan's Dyke area.
They included a picture of a tree which had the initials LM and [Name removed] carved into the bark.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4003009.stm

[Parky41]

From the context it appears she was told soon after.

‘ [11] The appellant telephoned the deceased's house at 1732, but received no reply. At 1740 he called again, and spoke to Alan Ovens, asking if the deceased was in. He was informed that she had left to meet him. He replied, "OK, cool". Ovens informed Judith Jones about this call’

So both AO and JuJ knew that Jodi wasn’t with Luke 40-50 minutes after she had left the house yet it didn’t raise alarm bells with them and they didn’t phone Luke again to check that she had got there.

Why was it thought suspicious that Luke, a young boy, failed to chase up what had happened to Jodi when her parents, the adults, didn't?

Double standards?

"double standards"

The same as neither party chose to phone the other?  That great divide between the two. Two sides.

Let's think about that in more detail. JuJ was under the impression that her daughter would be meeting with Luke, somewhere "up here"  She didn't know where but certainly appeared not to have been in the belief that her daughter would be walking to Luke's on her own, down a path which her mother did not approve of her using on her own, thus had told her not to? - that a fair assumption?

Now that missing detail - much like AB's, giving an approximation of when she had arrived home, basing this on receiving a phone call from he husband "about half an hour after" Which actually turned out to be a longer period of time than half an hour - didn't it? as they started from the beginning, using those till and ATM receipts. She hadn't kept check of 'real' time - these were approximations.

Now AO and JuJ, what were they doing in that time frame between Jodi leaving and this phone call? Were they busy, had they lost track of time, more so why would they be keeping a check on the time?  However, as above they give the same 'type' of information. Jodi had left, shortly after her leaving Luke phoned, I told him that "Jodi had already left to meet with her". They don't know the time of Luke's phone call however, they did not check, that is obvious as they did not stop and think 'oh wait a minute that was over half an hr ago, did they? But again, when these timings around phone calls are checked (by the shoddy police work) it turns out to be a longer period of time. However it is clear they are not concerned, why would they be as it is evident by their actions of not phoning Luke that they believe the couple had met. That they simply were not aware of how much time had passed?

On the other hand however, we have a boy who was very much aware of the time he had claimed to have been out of the house,  he tells of the rough time of leaving (around 5.30pm) and of the time he had phoned his friends to meet up in the Abbey. We know he is aware of the time as he phones them back "chasing them up" It is such an such a time, "where are you?" - concern that his friends hadn't arrived on time? He phoned them back, didn't he.

So this boy, who claims (knows by his account) that his girlfriend will be using this path alone, she does not turn up, specifically makes the point that he had not walked further than 'Barondale cottage' Just idles away for nearly two hours and thinks "she is not coming out" "I thought you had grounded her again"

A search is organised, it is known and believed at this point that the couple had not met. Luke tells JuJ he had not seen her all evening, that she failed to turn up at his.

"at his" - Luke then offers to search the path.

Clear reason yet again - why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated.

[faithlilly]

"double standards"

The same as neither party chose to phone the other?  That great divide between the two. Two sides.

Let's think about that in more detail. JuJ was under the impression that her daughter would be meeting with Luke, somewhere "up here"  She didn't know where but certainly appeared not to have been in the belief that her daughter would be walking to Luke's on her own, down a path which her mother did not approve of her using on her own, thus had told her not to? - that a fair assumption?

Now that missing detail - much like AB's, giving an approximation of when she had arrived home, basing this on receiving a phone call from he husband "about half an hour after" Which actually turned out to be a longer period of time than half an hour - didn't it? as they started from the beginning, using those till and ATM receipts. She hadn't kept check of 'real' time - these were approximations.

Now AO and JuJ, what were they doing in that time frame between Jodi leaving and this phone call? Were they busy, had they lost track of time, more so why would they be keeping a check on the time?  However, as above they give the same 'type' of information. Jodi had left, shortly after her leaving Luke phoned, I told him that "Jodi had already left to meet with her". They don't know the time of Luke's phone call however, they did not check, that is obvious as they did not stop and think 'oh wait a minute that was over half an hr ago, did they? But again, when these timings around phone calls are checked (by the shoddy police work) it turns out to be a longer period of time. However it is clear they are not concerned, why would they be as it is evident by their actions of not phoning Luke that they believe the couple had met. That they simply were not aware of how much time had passed?

On the other hand however, we have a boy who was very much aware of the time he had claimed to have been out of the house,  he tells of the rough time of leaving (around 5.30pm) and of the time he had phoned his friends to meet up in the Abbey. We know he is aware of the time as he phones them back "chasing them up" It is such an such a time, "where are you?" - concern that his friends hadn't arrived on time? He phoned them back, didn't he.

So this boy, who claims (knows by his account) that his girlfriend will be using this path alone, she does not turn up, specifically makes the point that he had not walked further than 'Barondale cottage' Just idles away for nearly two hours and thinks "she is not coming out" "I thought you had grounded her again"

A search is organised, it is known and believed at this point that the couple had not met. Luke tells JuJ he had not seen her all evening, that she failed to turn up at his.

"at his" - Luke then offers to search the path.

Clear reason yet again - why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated.

Do you ever provide sources or just hope that members will believe you?

Bottom line...JuJ knew from Luke’s phone call that Jodi hadn’t turned up to meet him up to 50 minutes after she had left the house. She was not supposed to be going to Newbattle according to JuJ but staying in Easthouses. As a mother, and an adult, all sorts of alarm bells should have started ringing, yet she did not check up on her daughter until after 10.30.

Luke was a child and probably thought, as his mum said, that she had met some friends. If Jodi had had a phone he no doubt would have called her to ask where she was. There was no point calling her home again as he knew that she wasn’t there.

Not sure what you think is suspicious about Luke saying ‘at his’? Explain please?

Of course in the first media reports on the 1st of July it was claimed that Jodi left her home at 5.30. That would certainly explain why JuJ wasn’t particularly worried when Luke called a few minutes later. Of course that would have thrown out of the window 5.15 as the time of the murder and with it Luke’s guilt.

Something to think about.

[Parky41]

It's not difficult to see why the police were instantly suspicious of Luke.

In Judith's first statement, she told police Luke had told her he was "coming up the path on his bike" and that statement wasn't corrected until almost a month later when Judith told police she'd made a mistake - Luke hadn't said that at all, he'd said he was coming up the path "with his dog."

Why instantly suspicious of Luke though? This statement was given afterwards, along with statements from the others.

One police officer noted, after taking the missing person details, that Jodi had left her home at tea time "with her boyfriend."

.
Both officers on the ground and the 999 operator were of the impression that Luke, and Luke alone, was (a) out looking for Jodi and (b) somewhere behind Newbattle High School on a path.

"one police officer" what did the other police officer note? Two officers in attendance at JuJ's house while Luke was on the path?  The search trio only heading out. Luke had spoken with JuJ at 10.59pm at the beginning of his search of the path. Fair to assume she informs the police of this, therefore at this point he is searching alone.

Then the officers on the ground get a shout - the boyfriend's found a body.

Even the conclusion that "the boyfriend's found a body" was wrong (in terms of the information being passed to them from control.) Luke told the operator they'd found something - she told the officers on the ground, "He won't say what." It was Kelly who dialled 999 a few minutes later and screamed down the phone, "It's a f*cking body."
But the operator(s) appeared to think the calls they were receiving were from the same person - Luke. The operator who took Kelly's call reported he found the caller's attitude odd - he wasn't reacting the way he'd have expected someone who'd just found a body to act - he seemed more annoyed that the police were taking so long to get there.

Couple of things here: Where is this confusion that there was 'only Luke?' from the operators? when the call clearly states - "they" however, from the moment the police arrive they are aware that there are four people, within no time at all they are aware that these 4 had been together at some point searching once statements were taken. 

What I really want to pick up on here is the actual part of what the operator said "the laddies in a right state" used when Ms Lean makes an attempt to show that Luke was not emotionless. Luke was calm and collective in his call, it was SK who was extremely distressed he was the "laddie in a right state" The defence attempted to use this at trial, until the actual recordings were played clearly showing it was the call from SK and not LM who was "in a right state."

Also remembering here the evidence of the emergency services whom attended at the scene, of LM's demeanor?

Certainly, however there are areas here, as to why suspicion fell upon LM, from this moment it became increasingly difficult to eliminate him

If they'd received the call "the search party have found a body," might they have been suspicious about Kelly's comment, "I suppose you've been to my house first?" If they'd been told Jodi was supposed to be hanging out in Easthouses/Mayfield and the family search trio were leaving from Mayfield to look for her, might they have thought it odd that they didn't look for her in Easthouses/Mayfield but headed straight for the path? Might they have thought it strange that, although there were four searchers out in two different areas, they were given only one contact number, for the lone searcher coming from Newbattle, and no contact details for the three searchers coming from Mayfield?

Covered this in another post - LM had told JuJ that Jodi had failed to turn up. She had not arrived at his. That he was searching the path. The search party were heading to meet up to search. LM was still on this path. That time frame - reported missing at 10.50pm found around 11.30pm She had failed to meet with Luke, the connecting area is the path however we know that the prompt for searching this path, came from LM. The search trio barely had time to draw breath before being led onto Roansdyke path?

[Nicholas]

Do you ever provide sources or just hope that members will believe you?

Bottom line...JuJ knew from Luke’s phone call that Jodi hadn’t turned up to meet him up to 50 minutes after she had left the house. She was not supposed to be going to Newbattle according to JuJ but staying in Easthouses. As a mother, and an adult, all sorts of alarm bells should have started ringing, yet she did not check up on her daughter until after 10.30.

How many sociopathic 14 year old murderers had JuJ met before Luke Mitchell?