Author Topic: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?  (Read 12330 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nicholas

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #240 on: November 05, 2023, 02:39:26 PM »
What about the call to Scott's Caravans at approx 1625?

There was no call to Scott Caravans from the Mitchell’s landline telephone

This was yet another Mitchell concoction
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #241 on: November 28, 2023, 03:34:23 AM »
The 9:57pm call from the Mitchell’s landline telephone was to a number in Bathgate

The 9:57pm was made by Shane Mitchell

Shane said he didn’t hear the news about Jodi Jones until his mother Corinne Mitchell phoned him and woke him up to take clothes to the police station
« Last Edit: November 28, 2023, 03:37:49 AM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Mr Apples

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #242 on: November 29, 2023, 04:46:28 AM »
"How could it be, Mr Mitchell, that Luke was in the house, you didn't think he was there, you didn't hear him there and you have no recollection of seeing him there, if he was?"

Exactly, Alan. The quote above, for me, sums up just how ridiculous Shane's evidence was. A complete debacle that demonstrated that his wee brother wasn't home. And contrary to what SL says, Shane did, eventually, concede his brother was not there when he arrived home at 1640 and when he went downstairs when his mother got home from work at 1720 (SM did try and wriggle his way out of admitting LM was not home by being vague and frequently saying he couldn't remember, but on his final day of evidence he categorically said his brother wasn't home between 1640 - 1720).

I do wonder if his telling the truth was borne of compassion & respect for Jodi or self-preservation? Probably the latter, imo, but then it might be an idea for me to read Shane's testimony in its entirety before drawing any conclusions on that (I've yet to read part 2 of his testimony). Maybe, too, because of his arrest on 14.04.04 and being charged with perverting the course of justice (subsequently, the charge was dropped as everyone knows), he was warned about perjury (and if not warned by the authorities, perhaps he himself was wary & conscious of it).

One final thing -- when was Shane's computer siezed and examined? I've always presumed it was before 14.04.04, as I don't think the police would arrest all 3 of them on the strength of Shane's changing his statement in early July '03 alone; the police having the evidence of his porn site visits combined with the changing of statements would be more robust evidence that would allow the police to formulate a theory that LM wasn't in the house and they were all lying and attempting to pervert the course of justice. It's just I'd seen a pic on alamy, dated 14.04.04, that showed police confiscating a PC (of course, it could have beein either LM's or CM's PC). The police interviewed SM for 6 hours on the morning of 14.04.04 after arresting him and, according to SL, the police introduced the porn site evidence in the last hour of that interview, so maybe they did only sieze SM's computer on the morning of 14.04.04 and only discovered the porn site evidence that same morning (allowing them to introduce it as evidence in the last hour of the interview). I don't think so, though? Anyone know? I haven't read all of SM's testimony, so maybe it's been explained.


Offline Nicholas

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #243 on: November 29, 2023, 12:17:26 PM »
"How could it be, Mr Mitchell, that Luke was in the house, you didn't think he was there, you didn't hear him there and you have no recollection of seeing him there, if he was?"

Exactly, Alan. The quote above, for me, sums up just how ridiculous Shane's evidence was. A complete debacle that demonstrated that his wee brother wasn't home. And contrary to what SL says, Shane did, eventually, concede his brother was not there when he arrived home at 1640 and when he went downstairs when his mother got home from work at 1720 (SM did try and wriggle his way out of admitting LM was not home by being vague and frequently saying he couldn't remember, but on his final day of evidence he categorically said his brother wasn't home between 1640 - 1720).

I do wonder if his telling the truth was borne of compassion & respect for Jodi or self-preservation?Probably the latter, imo, but then it might be an idea for me to read Shane's testimony in its entirety before drawing any conclusions on that (I've yet to read part 2 of his testimony).

If Shane Mitchell had any “compassion” or “respect” for Jodi Jones he would never have told the bare faced lies that he did

There’s more to Shane Mitchell’s story than he’s let on
« Last Edit: November 29, 2023, 12:36:27 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #244 on: November 29, 2023, 12:40:05 PM »
Probably the latter, imo, but then it might be an idea for me to read Shane's testimony in its entirety before drawing any conclusions on that (I've yet to read part 2 of his testimony). Maybe, too, because of his arrest on 14.04.04 and being charged with perverting the course of justice (subsequently, the charge was dropped as everyone knows), he was warned about perjury (and if not warned by the authorities, perhaps he himself was wary & conscious of it).

One final thing -- when was Shane's computer siezed and examined? I've always presumed it was before 14.04.04, as I don't think the police would arrest all 3 of them on the strength of Shane's changing his statement in early July '03 alone; the police having the evidence of his porn site visits combined with the changing of statements would be more robust evidence that would allow the police to formulate a theory that LM wasn't in the house and they were all lying and attempting to pervert the course of justice. It's just I'd seen a pic on alamy, dated 14.04.04, that showed police confiscating a PC (of course, it could have beein either LM's or CM's PC). The police interviewed SM for 6 hours on the morning of 14.04.04 after arresting him and, according to SL, the police introduced the porn site evidence in the last hour of that interview, so maybe they did only sieze SM's computer on the morning of 14.04.04 and only discovered the porn site evidence that same morning (allowing them to introduce it as evidence in the last hour of the interview). I don't think so, though? Anyone know? I haven't read all of SM's testimony, so maybe it's been explained.

Firmly suspect all computer equipment was seized early in the investigation

Have you read DI Craven’s trial testimony or any of the other police officers who gave evidence at the trial, like Dc Michelle Lindsay for example?

Evidence pertaining to Shane Mitchell will also be found in their trial testimony
« Last Edit: November 29, 2023, 01:54:45 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #245 on: December 05, 2023, 09:04:21 PM »
For many, SM’s failure to corroborate his younger brother’s alibi was one of the most salient pieces of evidence pointing towards LM’s guilt. Despite this, there doesn’t appear to be much information in the public domain regarding SM’s whereabouts that evening, after his infamous internet session between 1650 - 1716 hrs. The only info that does seem to be available around the issue of his whereabouts in the evening is that he left the house shortly after LM did (at approx 1730/1740 hrs) and, according to CM, he was in and out of the house quite a lot that evening (which CM said was a tad annoying as she was trying to have a fly cigarette, after telling her boys she had quit smoking; she mentions this in a podcast). The only other thing that has been mentioned with regards to SM’s whereabouts after 1730 hrs is that he was caught out lying/fabricating about where he had been that night and that he was allegedly, at one point that evening, 7 miles away somewhere filling his car with petrol.Why so far away? We know that he was in the house at 2240 as he had given LM a torch to go out searching for Jodi with (along with the dog, Mia). But, what was he doing over the entire course of that evening? A lot of focus was placed upon CM as possibly the person who was burning blood-stained, forensically incriminating clothing belonging to her son LM in the Mitchells’ log burner. But, could it have been SM solely who was the person burning said clothing? I did read very recently on a youtube comment (not the most reliable source, admittedly) that, in addition to fires being lit in the Mitchells’ garden at 1830 and 2200, there was another sighting of burning taking place in their garden at 0200 on 01.07.03 (in which case, it would have to have been SM doing this, since CM & LM were being questioned at the police station at this time). Or was it a joint effort by the two? Were their clothes tested? Were they smelling of smoke? More to the point, which other aspects of the case was SM cross-examined about or what evidence about him was led at court that was separate from his porn site/car site session?

I would really appreciate your input on this one, preferably with cites.

Thanks.

Quote
For many, SM’s failure to corroborate his younger brother’s alibi was one of the most salient pieces of evidence pointing towards LM’s guilt. Despite this, there doesn’t appear to be much information in the public domain regarding SM’s whereabouts that evening, after his infamous internet session between 1650 - 1716 hrs. The only info that does seem to be available around the issue of his whereabouts in the evening is that he left the house shortly after LM did (at approx 1730/1740 hrs) and, according to CM, he was in and out of the house quite a lot that evening (which CM said was a tad annoying as she was trying to have a fly cigarette, after telling her boys she had quit smoking; she mentions this in a podcast).


Shane Mitchell left his home at approx 6:30pm and arrived home before making the 9:57pm phone call via the landline

Does this constitute Corinne Mitchell’s claims of him being “in and out of the house quite a lot”?

Quote
The only other thing that has been mentioned with regards to SM’s whereabouts after 1730 hrs is that he was caught out lying/fabricating about where he had been that night and that he was allegedly, at one point that evening, 7 miles away somewhere filling his car with petrol.Why so far away?

What was Shane Mitchell doing going to get gas when he did?

Was he caught on CCTV when he went for gas?

Quote
We know that he was in the house at 2240 as he had given LM a torch to go out searching for Jodi with (along with the dog, Mia).

Yet no mention of a torch during his testimony?

Quote
I did read very recently on a youtube comment (not the most reliable source, admittedly) that, in addition to fires being lit in the Mitchells’ garden at 1830 and 2200, there was another sighting of burning taking place in their garden at 0200 on 01.07.03 (in which case, it would have to have been SM doing this, since CM & LM were being questioned at the police station at this time).

This is still very much a possibility

Quote
Were their clothes tested? Were they smelling of smoke? More to the point, which other aspects of the case was SM cross-examined about or what evidence about him was led at court that was separate from his porn site/car site session?

Obviously Shane and Corinne Mitchell’s clothing wasn’t tested

There’s still a page missing from Shane Mitchell’s testimony but other evidence regarding him may have come out via other witnesses - like for example the police witnesses

Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Mr Apples

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #246 on: December 05, 2023, 11:17:04 PM »




There’s still a page missing from Shane Mitchell’s testimony but other evidence regarding him may have come out via other witnesses - like for example the police witnesses

I would like to read the evidence from the DC who interviewed SM on the morning of 14.04.04 when SM said: "He couldnae have been in the house if people had seen him." Outwith the presence of jury, DF had discussions with Lord N Smith & AD Turnbull regarding the 'unfairness' with which he thought a lot of the information from the aforementioned interview had been obtained, and was concerned of the ramifications it would have for the accused (ie, LM). This quote ("He couldnae have been there if people had seen him.") from SM was one in particular DF was concerned about, but, interestingly, didn't say it was an outright nonsense based on an unfair proposition, but, rather, drew attention to the word "people" and said it was, in the context of that part of the interview, inaccurate as it was only AB who had seen him (LM) at that point. For SM to have said what he said, imo, is very odd. Had he finally cracked by that point in the interview, and was sick of lying? Or was there an entirely innocent explanation for him saying that? Hopefully, testimony from the DC who interviewed SM when he said that will show up on the new blog.

Offline Nicholas

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #247 on: December 05, 2023, 11:47:32 PM »
I would like to read the evidence from the DC who interviewed SM on the morning of 14.04.04 when SM said: “He couldnae have been in the house if people had seen him." Outwith the presence of jury, DF had discussions with Lord N Smith & AD Turnbull regarding the 'unfairness' with which he thought a lot of the information from the aforementioned interview had been obtained, and was concerned of the ramifications it would have for the accused (ie, LM). This quote ("He couldnae have been there if people had seen him.") from SM was one in particular DF was concerned about, but, interestingly, didn't say it was an outright nonsense based on an unfair proposition, but, rather, drew attention to the word "people" and said it was, in the context of that part of the interview, inaccurate as it was only AB who had seen him (LM) at that point. For SM to have said what he said, imo, is very odd. Had he finally cracked by that point in the interview, and was sick of lying? Or was there an entirely innocent explanation for him saying that? Hopefully, testimony from the DC who interviewed SM when he said that will show up on the new blog.

I found a lot of what Shane Mitchell said “odd”

I don’t think the Easton’s will be purchasing all of the trial transcripts

They will cost a few thousand pounds, plus there’s the 20% which apparently hasn’t been transcribed yet?
« Last Edit: December 05, 2023, 11:52:05 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #248 on: March 02, 2024, 06:16:10 PM »
There were no calls made from the landline from the Mitchell house between 4:01pm up to 9:57pm

None!

The 9:57pm call from the Mitchell’s landline telephone was to a number in Bathgate

Does Whitburn come under Bathgate ?

Wasn’t the other Kimberley Thomson from Whitburn? (Pages 1583 & 1611 of Sgt George Thomson’s 29th Dec’ testimony)

There was also mention of a Kimberley Tait

👇🏼
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10768.msg707232#msg707232
« Last Edit: March 02, 2024, 06:35:57 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #249 on: March 02, 2024, 06:48:07 PM »
Does Whitburn come under Bathgate ?

Wasn’t the other Kimberley Thomson from Whitburn? (Pages 1583 & 1611 of Sgt George Thomson’s 29th Dec’ testimony)

There was also mention of a Kimberley Tait

👇🏼
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10768.msg707232#msg707232

Liar Sandra Lean (and others) have claimed these young girls didn’t come forward until after killer Luke Mitchell was convicted
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Parky41

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #250 on: March 02, 2024, 09:02:21 PM »
Does Whitburn come under Bathgate ?

Wasn’t the other Kimberley Thomson from Whitburn? (Pages 1583 & 1611 of Sgt George Thomson’s 29th Dec’ testimony)

There was also mention of a Kimberley Tait

👇🏼
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10768.msg707232#msg707232

It does indeed come under Bathgate.

Offline Parky41

Re: Shane Mitchell’s whereabouts during the course of the entire evening?
« Reply #251 on: March 02, 2024, 09:04:01 PM »
I found a lot of what Shane Mitchell said “odd”

I don’t think the Easton’s will be purchasing all of the trial transcripts

They will cost a few thousand pounds, plus there’s the 20% which apparently hasn’t been transcribed yet?

I don't think so either which is fair enough, such a lot of money to fork out.