Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10
71
I think he cycled over via the abbey/the field north of the woodland strip (his yellow pushbike was spotted by JF & GD chained to the railings at the back of NB high school that fateful afternoon). Probably just a coincidence no one saw him (unless, of course, he had preplanned the murder, in which case he likely went out of his way to not be seen). Interestingly, the David High transcript, if my memory serves, indicates that LM was spotted by witnesses at a park on his bike, but it doesn't state at which time or where exactly. My hunch tells me that it was probably between 1640-1650 as he cycled over to meet Jodi just after her last text came through at 1638. And all these times really do add up and strongly point to LM as the culprit (Occam's razor).

And [Name removed] and [Name removed]’s motorbike was seen at the v in the wall behind which Jodi’s body was found at around the time the police say that the murder was committed. [Name removed] admitted as much in his court testimony. Yet when asked about it in court both [Name removed] and [Name removed] couldn’t remember where they’d been. Through the prism of Occam’s razor how would you explain that? Or is your theory based exclusively on ‘hunches’?
72
It doesn't work like that, Faith. May I respectfully suggest putting the PD James & Judith Cutler novels down and doing more research into this case until you reach a more sound conclusion?? Occam's razor is your friend, btw.

Occam’s razor most certainly is your friend. It’s a pity then you fail to applythat to your own research.

For Luke to have done what you propose he did the murder would have to have premeditated. There doesn’t seem to have been any evidence presented in court that there was any animosity between the couple at lunchtime on the Monday so why do you think he set out to commit the murder? Jodi herself describes Luke in her diary as understanding and sympathetic so what do you think turned him into a killer?
73

Another very strange thing..... how could he have managed to walk the full length of that path which is close to a mile and would take maybe 20m to walk at average pace, without one person seeing him walking from one end to the other? If he walked along there from 435pm to 455pm on a bright dry day in summer, there would surely have been at least some walkers, cyclists, dog walkers, maybe even teenagers on bikes etc who would have seen him? It's not impossible of course, but at that time it seems highly unlikely not one person saw him walking on the path towards Easthouses. Even Leonard Kelly didn't see him and he cycled the whole length of the path between about 5.10 and 5.20pm. None of it makes any rational sense.

I think he cycled over via the abbey/the field north of the woodland strip (his yellow pushbike was spotted by JF & GD chained to the railings at the back of NB high school that fateful afternoon). Probably just a coincidence no one saw him (unless, of course, he had preplanned the murder, in which case he likely went out of his way to not be seen). Interestingly, the David High transcript, if my memory serves, indicates that LM was spotted by witnesses at a park on his bike, but it doesn't state at which time or where exactly. My hunch tells me that it was probably between 1640-1650 as he cycled over to meet Jodi just after her last text came through at 1638. And all these times really do add up and strongly point to LM as the culprit (Occam's razor).
74
Or that he didn’t do it perhaps?

It doesn't work like that, Faith. May I respectfully suggest putting the PD James & Judith Cutler novels down and doing more research into this case until you reach a more sound conclusion?? Occam's razor is your friend, btw.
76
WW: taking your claim that the witness sightings of LM did not happen or were someone else, would that someone else not have been traced and identified, particularly the "teenage couple" who were seen at the entrance to the path.

While claiming all the LM court witnesses were wrong or unreliable, you've offered ?? as an alternative being witnessed by an unknown person at 4.45pm? This "witness" has never been named or used by the defence as the last person to see [Name removed] alive. I believe this was a false trail that the police did not pursue, or surely the defence would have called them as a witness?

The witness identified "he who cannot be named" after seeing him on TV at the funeral. This witness does not appear to have been cited by the Prosecution, because it would have probably damaged the case against LM. I don't think this witness sighting was ever notified to the defence, although I'm not 100pc sure about that.

Your point about the couple never being traced is a good one as they would absolutely have been traced in an area which has a population of only about 8000.I think the reason they were never traced is because one of them was Jodi and the other was the person who killed her, but I don't think that youth seen by AB was Mitchell. Her description didn't match Mitchell....hair up in a clump, jacket with bulging pocket etc.

Another very strange thing..... how could he have managed to walk the full length of that path which is close to a mile and would take maybe 20m to walk at average pace, without one person seeing him walking from one end to the other? If he walked along there from 435pm to 455pm on a bright dry day in summer, there would surely have been at least some walkers, cyclists, dog walkers, maybe even teenagers on bikes etc who would have seen him? It's not impossible of course, but at that time it seems highly unlikely not one person saw him walking on the path towards Easthouses. Even Leonard Kelly didn't see him and he cycled the whole length of the path between about 5.10 and 5.20pm. None of it makes any rational sense.



77
I agree - that is not Madeleine - but neither is it the little girl in the original photograph.



Sorry Brie, but almost certainly the little girl being carried is Madeleine.   As a secondary school art teacher I used to teach portraiture and figure drawing and speak with some authority.
I know that Ret Sym (Myster) is quite an artist too, but it aint portraiture.

From the body and head the little girl in the orange top is almost certainly Joana.
78
That is NOT Madeleine...





Of course it isn't Madeleine. 

The image you show was taken several days after Madeleines image on a wo/mans back was published on the internet.   

 

It is a staged photograph of Bushra on her mothers back taken several days later.

Disinformation.
79

If someone stated he could not have did something, I have combatted it with what could have been achieved. For that time period I worked at one point with the bare minimum of 13mins.


That’s rather like the government saying that Rwanda is a safe country. It’s simply not enough to say it is when the opposite has been proved.
80
What -- taking into consideration all that has been released transcript wise thus far and your own personal research thus far -- do you think LM did between 1740 - 1755? Do you think he had a bomber jacket planked nearby to change in to (ie, planked there previously by himself?) Do you think it was brought to him by either CM or SM? Or do you think he went home to change jackets? Or that he had worn the waist-length bomber jacket beneath his veneers of clothing between 1740-1820?

Or that he didn’t do it perhaps?
Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10