AB, when presented with that book of photographs by the police, said 'she was as sure as she could be' that it was him. In court, when asked if she could id him, she said, "I don't know". She didn't outright say no. The reason for her saying she didn't know was because of how much LM had changed physically since 30.06.03 & her court appearance 18 months later, and his clothing & appearance; he was still developing and going through puberty. Likewise, LF & RW both said "Oh my god! It's him!" when they saw his picture in a newspaper. They also id'd him in court. CH said the youth she saw on the road was "very very similar to LM" and she too id'd him in court. One major point you've omitted from your post above is that 3 youths on pushbikes who knew LM personally saw him on the road at just before 1800 and they too id'd him in court, so that only reinforces the the view that this youth on the NB rd between 1740 - 1820 was indeed the same person -- LM. The only anomaly in regards to eyewitness testimony was the testimony of that couple, MOS & DH, though I think a transcript of their testimony will clarify their doubt that this youth was LM (I think that they said it wasn't him because of how much he'd changed from their sighting and their court appearance, just like it confused AB). Given that all these eyewitnesses only saw LM for a couple of seconds from a car, I think they did well.to recall what they did.
I can tell that you think it could've been MK, even though he was ruled out as per DNA. My only problem with MK theories is that no one seems to know his whereabouts that day, with the exception of him being seen at an off-licence buying alcohol at just before closing time (ie, 2200). So, I'll ask it again: where was MK between 1300 - 2200 on 30.06.03?
Yes he was definitely ID'd by the boys on the push bikes because one of them knew him. Regarding the M'O'S sighting I don't think there was anything said about LM changing. She and her husband just said it was definitely not Mitchell. They were certain about it. The person they saw was significantly older and much taller than LM who was about 5-4. M'O'S still says to this day it was 100% not LM.
MK - how can he have been ruled out by DNA when the Police didn't investigate anything about him at the time? His whereabouts on the day of the murder are unknown, apart from a brief sighting on an off sales CCTV. I think this was at 730pm although it may have been later. So his whereabouts were unknown before then all day and after then all night.
MK:
Known drug and alcohol issues
Known to carry knives
Known to have been violent
Turned up at Scott Forbes' flat the morning after the murder with scratches all over his face which he gave no sensible explanation for.
Wrote 2 essays called "No Remorse" about killing a girl in the woods. (Police denied these existed)
Knew the area very well as was living in Newbattle College
Whereabouts unknown on the whole day of the murder apart from 5 minutes on a shop's CCTV.
Looked very similar to Mitchell but was significantly taller.
He also matches the description by M.O'S as being tall and much taller than Mitchell. I believe he was about 6-2. MK was never made a suspect which is beyond baffling.
Doesn't sound too good does it?