Luke Mitchell Theories

[Venturi Swirl]

Of course you don’t respond directly to me. I called you out on a lie. I wouldn’t respond to me either after that.

I guess that's why you don't respond directly to me, lol.

[Parky41]

Let's apply reality around why some are striving to place the scene of crime elsewhere? You asked a question VS to which you have had no answer, that is because both answers end with LM.

The attempt to place the scene of crime elsewhere is to exclude LM as being the killer. The reason giving for moving the body from scene of crime (their invented one) to behind the wall, is because they claim the killer/s were framing LM from the get go.

And further down that rabbit hole we go.

Chris - Where is your alternate hypothesis? - Work us through why the forensic team applied it as the scene of crime? Work us through that alternate scene of crime right up to the point of arriving at the forensic teams scene of crime. We need every piece of science along the way. Every rational, scientific explanation, as to how the blood was in that expansive area set as scene of crime by the killer/s.

Therefore it is as simple as that, for you. - What is your scientific explanation as to how the blood was at scene of crime determined by forensics?

[Venturi Swirl]

Let's apply reality around why some are striving to place the scene of crime elsewhere? You asked a question VS to which you have had no answer, that is because both answers end with LM.

The attempt to place the scene of crime elsewhere is to exclude LM as being the killer. The reason giving for moving the body from scene of crime (their invented one) to behind the wall, is because they claim the killer/s were framing LM from the get go.

And further down that rabbit hole we go.

Chris - Where is your alternate hypothesis? - Work us through why the forensic team applied it as the scene of crime? Work us through that alternate scene of crime right up to the point of arriving at the forensic teams scene of crime. We need every piece of science along the way. Every rational, scientific explanation, as to how the blood was in that expansive area set as scene of crime by the killer/s.

Therefore it is as simple as that, for you. - What is your scientific explanation as to how the blood was at scene of crime determined by forensics?

I don't see how that works though.  What difference does it make to the logistics of Mitchell being the murderer where precisely (within the general locale) the actual murder took place?  Also are there actually people here who believe that Jodi was murdered with the specific intent to put Mitchell behind bars?!  That numerous people conspired to this end?  He must have been very well despised if so many people had it in for him from the get go, what did he do to upset them all? 

[Parky41]

I don't see how that works though.  What difference does it make to the logistics of Mitchell being the murderer where precisely (within the general locale) the actual murder took place?  Also are there actually people here who believe that Jodi was murdered with the specific intent to put Mitchell behind bars?!  That numerous people conspired to this end?  He must have been very well despised if so many people had it in for him from the get go, what did he do to upset them all?

It is as one of my first posts applied. That when all legal avenues had been exhausted one must try to change public opinion. Take the focus away from the convicted, attempt to show a self interest route in others. By doing so it will make people question the veracity of their testimony and so forth.

That is exactly what has/is taken place. It is tactical. The trouble being, that the people who have created this self interest route have built it upon lies! It is this which is being exposed repeatedly just now.

By having this in place, based upon lies, it has evolved into multiple crazy conspiracy theories, born from the same people who invented a false narrative re self interest in the first instance. The theories are crazy because it is not based upon truth.

Such as, how did the investigation lead into LM, why him? And supporters are fed off the wall nonsense answers. Trying to work their way out of a manipulated false narrative.

And all the while they are led away from the one person an investigation had focus upon, forensics, the Crown - The victim. They were out to fit no one up, and they certainly did not ignore all these others. The irony of using the victim, by way of lying and applying they want justice for her. It is a tactical scam. Doing what did actually take place with the investigation, the family and so forth, and placing that fake claim with themselves!

So yes, you are correct - It makes no sense, none of it, because it is based upon lies in the first instance. A made up evolving conspiracy to get a boy, where there has been nothing that even borders on logical for doing so.

 

[Mr Apples]

Once again I ask - why would the precise site of the murder reveal incriminating evidence about who the murderer had been anymore than the site where the body was actually found?  Isn’t moving a bloody corpse from one area to another fantastically risky in itself given the opportunity for dna transference and being seen in this apparently heavily frequented area?  And then to return to the scene of the crime to clean up to potentially leave more incriminating evidence days later?  Why would it have been worth these risks to the killer to do so and moreover why does any of this preclude Mitchell from being the perp?

And not to mention, as I've already highlighted, the inaccessibility of the locus itself. You can't reach it from any direction with a car and, even if one could, it would be antithetical to commiting/hiding a crime; by driving to the locus, it would make one VERY conspicous. It's absurd!

Occam's razor = LM is guilty.

The end.

[faithlilly]

It is as one of my first posts applied. That when all legal avenues had been exhausted one must try to change public opinion. Take the focus away from the convicted, attempt to show a self interest route in others. By doing so it will make people question the veracity of their testimony and so forth.

That is exactly what has/is taken place. It is tactical. The trouble being, that the people who have created this self interest route have built it upon lies! It is this which is being exposed repeatedly just now.

By having this in place, based upon lies, it has evolved into multiple crazy conspiracy theories, born from the same people who invented a false narrative re self interest in the first instance. The theories are crazy because it is not based upon truth.

Such as, how did the investigation lead into LM, why him? And supporters are fed off the wall nonsense answers. Trying to work their way out of a manipulated false narrative.

And all the while they are led away from the one person an investigation had focus upon, forensics, the Crown - The victim. They were out to fit no one up, and they certainly did not ignore all these others. The irony of using the victim, by way of lying and applying they want justice for her. It is a tactical scam. Doing what did actually take place with the investigation, the family and so forth, and placing that fake claim with themselves!

So yes, you are correct - It makes no sense, none of it, because it is based upon lies in the first instance. A made up evolving conspiracy to get a boy, where there has been nothing that even borders on logical for doing so.

Who do we believe that there’s something very wrong with this case?

John Scott KC who took silk in 2011 and has twice publicly vocalised his doubts with regard to Luke’s guilt or Parky, the guy from the internet whose credibility has slowly been chipped away as his duplicity has been revealed.

It’s a tough choice.

[Venturi Swirl]

Who do we believe that there’s something very wrong with this case?

John Scott KC who took silk in 2011 and has twice publicly vocalised his doubts with regard to Luke’s guilt or Parky, the guy from the internet whose credibility has slowly been chipped away as his duplicity has been revealed.

It’s a tough choice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

[Venturi Swirl]

Who do we believe that there’s something very wrong with this case?

John Scott KC who took silk in 2011 and has twice publicly vocalised his doubts with regard to Luke’s guilt or Parky, the guy from the internet whose credibility has slowly been chipped away as his duplicity has been revealed.

It’s a tough choice.

Who should we believe is in a better position to pass comment on this case - John Scott KC who I don’t believe sat through the trial or the appeal process or The Lord Justice General, Lord Hamilton, sitting with Lord Osborne and Lord Kingarth who did and who upheld the guilty verdict?  Hmmm, tough choice…

[Mr Apples]

And not to mention, as I've already highlighted, the inaccessibility of the locus itself. You can't reach it from any direction with a car and, even if one could, it would be antithetical to commiting/hiding a crime; by driving to the locus, it would make one VERY conspicous. It's absurd!

Occam's razor = LM is guilty.

The end.

And to apply more common sense and logic: given the location of the crime scene, it would tend to strongly suggest that it was a local who did it. Where Jodi's body was found was about the only place in the local vicinity where it stood a good chance of being undetected for a good while, and therefore leading one to conclude safely & confidently that it was a local with intimate knowledge of the area who did it. As per AO's testimony, JOSJ was still in the house when Jodi left at 1650 (the time meticulously calculated by virtue of the police carefully reconstructing AO's journey home from work using cctv footage and his account of what happened in the house when he arrived home before Jodi left at 1650). Jodi leaving at 1650 to meet with the one person she was most certainly due to meet and had arranged to meet via text just 15 mins earlier -- the same young lad with the unique image and fashion sense who was positively identified at both ends of the path between 1655 - 1800. Initially seen in a confrontation with a female who matched Jodi's description at 1655 at the easthouses end of RDP, then spotted some 45 mins later in that same grungey army clothing and sporting that kurt cobain hairstyle by 8 separate people at the other end of the path standing like a spare sausage looking, as at least 5 eyewitnesses said under oath, 'suspicious'. Oh, and between these sightings of this distinctive grungey kid with the distinctive Kurt Cobain hairstyle, a cyclist (LK) just happened to hear disturbing strangling noises behind that rdp wall at 1715 hrs as he was cycling by going home to Easthouses; it has emerged that this cyclist has since passed away, his partner saying that he had never really forgiven himself for not stopping to investigate those strange noises coming from behind the wall that day, as he could have prevented the murder of an innocent child; LK since that day suffered panic attacks and flashbacks of the scene, so it obviously had a profoundly devastating effect on his mental health (you can read about LK's ordeal and struggles on Nicholas's 'Innocence Fraud Blog').Oh, and the 'stocky man' theory has been debunked numerous times over the years -- he had been out of the country at the time, but was spotted not long after, high-fiving his mates, and was subsequently checked out by police and eliminated. There are just far too many coincidences for it not to have been LM. Christ on a bike, he bought identical clothing to the clothing he denied having in the first place before the murder but which a considerable amount of eyewitnesses said under oath he did have before the murder; if this isn't a huge indicator that he's guilty, I don't know what is. Honestly, menschen!

[faithlilly]

And to apply more common sense and logic: given the location of the crime scene, it would tend to strongly suggest that it was a local who did it. Where Jodi's body was found was about the only place in the local vicinity where it stood a good chance of being undetected for a good while, and therefore leading one to conclude safely & confidently that it was a local with intimate knowledge of the area who did it. As per AO's testimony, JOSJ was still in the house when Jodi left at 1650 (the time meticulously calculated by virtue of the police carefully reconstructing AO's journey home from work using cctv footage and his account of what happened in the house when he arrived home before Jodi left at 1650). Jodi leaving at 1650 to meet with the one person she was most certainly due to meet and had arranged to meet via text just 15 mins earlier -- the same young lad with the unique image and fashion sense who was positively identified at both ends of the path between 1655 - 1800. Initially seen in a confrontation with a female who matched Jodi's description at 1655 at the easthouses end of RDP, then spotted some 45 mins later in that same grungey army clothing and sporting that kurt cobain hairstyle by 8 separate people at the other end of the path standing like a spare sausage looking, as at least 5 eyewitnesses said under oath, 'suspicious'. Oh, and between these sightings of this distinctive grungey kid with the distinctive Kurt Cobain hairstyle, a cyclist (LK) just happened to hear disturbing strangling noises behind that rdp wall at 1715 hrs as he was cycling by going home to Easthouses; it has emerged that this cyclist has since passed away, his partner saying that he had never really forgiven himself for not stopping to investigate those strange noises coming from behind the wall that day, as he could have prevented the murder of an innocent child; LK since that day suffered panic attacks and flashbacks of the scene, so it obviously had a profoundly devastating effect on his mental health (you can read about LK's ordeal and struggles on Nicholas's 'Innocence Fraud Blog').Oh, and the 'stocky man' theory has been debunked numerous times over the years -- he had been out of the country at the time, but was spotted not long after, high-fiving his mates, and was subsequently checked out by police and eliminated. There are just far too many coincidences for it not to have been LM. Christ on a bike, he bought identical clothing to the clothing he denied having in the first place before the murder but which a considerable amount of eyewitnesses said under oath he did have before the murder; if this isn't a huge indicator that he's guilty, I don't know what is. Honestly, menschen!

I’ve haven’t as yet seen Ovens testimony but if [Name removed] was seen following his sister, as we are told he was, then he could have left slightly after Jodi. In fact that would be the logical conclusion to make.

Would it be rude of me to point out that apart from Nicholas’s blog we have no no evidence that there was any connection whatsoever between LK’s connection to the case and his untimely demise. None, nada, zilch.

I’ve also heard that LK admitted that he had been pressured by the police and was told in no uncertain terms that if he didn’t say what they wanted then they’d put him in the frame. Don’t you think that there’s as much a chance that LK’s demise was hastened by the knowledge that his false testimony put a young boy in prison for life? That must have been an awful burden to carry, if it’s true. I’ve also heard of other individuals, some of them children, who were also bullied in a similar manner. Of course you won’t believe it because rumour is only considered credible if it fits your already formed opinion that Luke is guilty.

[William Wallace]

We’ve already been round the houses on this.  Satanism is according to Mitchell himself his religion.  Enough said.  But even if he had had zero interest in Satanism my point stands.  You can be an evil little shit like Brianna Ghey’s murderers even without being a self professed Satan worshipper!

I asked you where the proof is that Mitchell was interested in Satanism. Proof would be books, images, membership of groups, witnesses able to confirm any of this. As I predicted, you failed to provide any.

[William Wallace]

And to apply more common sense and logic: given the location of the crime scene, it would tend to strongly suggest that it was a local who did it. Where Jodi's body was found was about the only place in the local vicinity where it stood a good chance of being undetected for a good while, and therefore leading one to conclude safely & confidently that it was a local with intimate knowledge of the area who did it. As per AO's testimony, JOSJ was still in the house when Jodi left at 1650 (the time meticulously calculated by virtue of the police carefully reconstructing AO's journey home from work using cctv footage and his account of what happened in the house when he arrived home before Jodi left at 1650). Jodi leaving at 1650 to meet with the one person she was most certainly due to meet and had arranged to meet via text just 15 mins earlier -- the same young lad with the unique image and fashion sense who was positively identified at both ends of the path between 1655 - 1800. Initially seen in a confrontation with a female who matched Jodi's description at 1655 at the easthouses end of RDP, then spotted some 45 mins later in that same grungey army clothing and sporting that kurt cobain hairstyle by 8 separate people at the other end of the path standing like a spare sausage looking, as at least 5 eyewitnesses said under oath, 'suspicious'. Oh, and between these sightings of this distinctive grungey kid with the distinctive Kurt Cobain hairstyle, a cyclist (LK) just happened to hear disturbing strangling noises behind that rdp wall at 1715 hrs as he was cycling by going home to Easthouses; it has emerged that this cyclist has since passed away, his partner saying that he had never really forgiven himself for not stopping to investigate those strange noises coming from behind the wall that day, as he could have prevented the murder of an innocent child; LK since that day suffered panic attacks and flashbacks of the scene, so it obviously had a profoundly devastating effect on his mental health (you can read about LK's ordeal and struggles on Nicholas's 'Innocence Fraud Blog').Oh, and the 'stocky man' theory has been debunked numerous times over the years -- he had been out of the country at the time, but was spotted not long after, high-fiving his mates, and was subsequently checked out by police and eliminated. There are just far too many coincidences for it not to have been LM. Christ on a bike, he bought identical clothing to the clothing he denied having in the first place before the murder but which a considerable amount of eyewitnesses said under oath he did have before the murder; if this isn't a huge indicator that he's guilty, I don't know what is. Honestly, menschen!

I'm afraid you are just moving the goalposts around again. Firstly there are plenty places nearby where a body would not be discovered. There are expansive woods fairly close where the trees are much denser than beside the V where they are actually very thin. You can walk from the V into a field in less than 30 seconds. The part that you got right was about it being a local, but that's obvious.

He who cannot be named was not in the house at 4.50pm whatever anyone else in the house says. He was seen following Jodi at 4.45pm by a witness. It was not confirmed by Police either that he was in the house after the murder either because they didn't look in his room.

Where do you get the "he was positively identified at both ends of the path" from? Can't you stick to facts? The facts are Bryson did not see the youth's face and her description of the girl's clothing did not match Jodi's. What happened to Bryson's dock identification with this positive sighting? Jodi's top had a very large distinctive orange logo on the back of it which was never mentioned by Bryson.

I can't be bothered going through the ridiculous evidence given by Fleming and Walsh, one of whom admitted she only saw the youth in her car rear view mirror and the other said she saw Mitchell in the Press on a day when no pictures of him had yet appeared in said Press. Nonsensical. Is that what you call a positive sighting?

As for the strangling noises...this only got stated by him in Court. At the time it was a noise like branches rustling he supposedly heard. I could add something about whether he could be a reliable independent witness or not but because he's deceased I will refrain from commenting on that.

Jodi's body was moved and almost certainly dragged, proved by the absence of blood where she was found. The dragging is almost certainly proven by the fact her socks were inside out and the outside was clean but the inside was dirty. Someone dragged her then put her socks back on with the clean side on the outside. So now can you explain not only how Mitchell avoided getting any blood on him when he killed her but also how he avoided getting blood on him when he moved and dragged her?

[Mr Apples]

I’ve haven’t as yet seen Ovens testimony but if [Name removed] was seen following his sister, as we are told he was, then he could have left slightly after Jodi. In fact that would be the logical conclusion to make.

Would it be rude of me to point out that apart from Nicholas’s blog we have no no evidence that there was any connection whatsoever between LK’s connection to the case and his untimely demise. None, nada, zilch.

I’ve also heard that LK admitted that he had been pressured by the police and was told in no uncertain terms that if he didn’t say what they wanted then they’d put him in the frame. Don’t you think that there’s as much a chance that LK’s demise was hastened by the knowledge that his false testimony put a young boy in prison for life? That must have been an awful burden to carry, if it’s true. I’ve also heard of other individuals, some of them children, who were also bullied in a similar manner. Of course you won’t believe it because rumour is only considered credible if it fits your already formed opinion that Luke is guilty.

We could cross swords on this until doomsday, but, in this instance, my dad is bigger than your dad. You know fine well that stocky man wasn't JOSJ; it's been proved/debunked several times. Besides, no incriminating DNA belonging to JOSJ was found either at the locus or in the houses he frequently visited (ie, his mother's, gran's or YW's). Sure, I am thoroughly convinced LM is guilty, but am not so blinded that I'd be unwillng to explore credible theories that would infer someone else did it. There were plenty of people who could have done it, but, once they are examined closely, it becomes very unlikely that they were responsible.

Do you have any cites for LK or any other witnesses who were leaned on or bullied by police?

[William Wallace]

And not to mention, as I've already highlighted, the inaccessibility of the locus itself. You can't reach it from any direction with a car and, even if one could, it would be antithetical to commiting/hiding a crime; by driving to the locus, it would make one VERY conspicous. It's absurd!

Occam's razor = LM is guilty.

The end.

Funny that, because 2 people did drive to the locus but couldn't remember what they were doing.

[William Wallace]

We could cross swords on this until doomsday, but, in this instance, my dad is bigger than your dad. You know fine well that stocky man wasn't JOSJ; it's been proved/debunked several times. Besides, no incriminating DNA belonging to JOSJ was found either at the locus or in the houses he frequently visited (ie, his mother's, gran's or YW's). Sure, I am thoroughly convinced LM is guilty, but am not so blinded that I'd be unwillng to explore credible theories that would infer someone else did it. There were plenty of people who could have done it, but, once they are examined closely, it becomes very unlikely that they were responsible.

Do you have any cites for LK or any other witnesses who were leaned on or bullied by police?

I'm glad to hear you are not blinded. Unfortunately there are people who were not closely examined at the time. There lies the biggest problem with this case.