Yes they do expose the nonsense that she tries hard to back what comes forth from 'auld Nick'
This from Sandra Lean on 28th February 2010
“I have, until now, chosen to ignore the personal comments posted here, on the grounds that they are of no bearing on the discussions at hand. This latest post, however, leaves me no option but to respond. Mr Middleton was acquitted.
Much of what you post here is the same sensationalist media garbage that plays such a huge part in convicting innocent people.
I note you fail to mention that Mr Middleton set up an organisation to help other wrongly accused people, www.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk and has devoted himself to that organisation since being acquitted. I was honoured to be asked to join that organisation, and am proud to be part of it.
How you can attempt to pass yourself off as a champion of those suffering injustice, when you can stoop to these depths to smear an INNOCENT man, in your attempts to discredit me, is beyond me and, I suspect, any right thinking person.
Did you at any point stop to think about the appalling suffering you would cause Mr Middleton? Using the tragic accidental death of a baby, and the terrible grief of an entire family, to score points in a petty campaign to rubbish me is unforgivable.
Shame on you, Mr Beck.
It will, of course, be for Mr Middleton to decide whether he wishes to take legal action regarding the content and intention of this post.
Sandra Leanhttps://www.tapatalk.com/groups/shirleymckie/luke-mitchell-postings-now-archived-see-new-thread-t398-s160.htmlUnconvicted baby killer, sexual deviant and abusive fraudster “
take legal action”
The same dangerous fraudster who one of his ex boss’s exposed - along with many other people (who knew Billy Middleton, long before Sandra Lean)
But Sandra Lean wanted fraudster Billy Middleton manipulative BS and fabricated narrative for her ‘
study’
👇
Posted: Wed Sep 14, 2011 9:38 am
"I do feel incredibly angry that Billy Middleton feels that he has the right to publish on the internet whatever he wants without fear of retribution.
Reading his MOJ2010 speech just puts my blood pressure right up because there is hardly one single paragraph that contains the whole truth. Unfortunately there is very little that I can state as "fact" as at it would mean exposing people and information that at the moment has to remain confidential. I am, however, now in a position to comment on the following subject things that I was told as Billy took it upon himself to expose his ex-wife as the person to whom the sexual assault charges concerned.
He himself describes the charge as "sexual abuse". I'm unclear why. As far as I know the charges were of sexual assault. To my mind sexual abuse indicates a more long term situation. A freudian slip, perhaps?. Maybe this was closer to the truth of what was happening in Billy and Kareen's relationship.
However Billy Middleton states: "They then threw in a charge of sexual abuse against my wife instead but both she and her uncle proved in court it was not physically possible because we were about 60 miles apart at the time and the doctor who examined her testified that there was no physical evidence to support it.
Billy put forward a special plea of 'consent' to the sexual assault charges yet in the statement above he is implying that it never happened and that this was "proved in court". He can't have it both ways - either his ex-wife consented or else it didn't happen, not both.
The only 'incident' of sexual assault Kareen discussed with me in any detail was the time that caused her to leave Billy in April/May 2007. Remember, this was about 2 years before the trial and 18 months before the fire. It was the first time I visited her at her aunt and uncle's house in Brae after she left Cullivoe with the kids. She told me what Billy had done to her. Needless to say, I was appalled. She was upset and confused and asked my advice on what to do. She spoke about going back to him as she was afraid if she left him for good what he would do. Billy was constantly texting her and using the children as a weapon against her, saying things like did she really want the kids to come from a broken home and she was to think about the effect all this was having on them. Things like that. I advised her not to go back to him. She was 3 months pregnant with Annalise at the time.
More
👇https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg385712.html#msg385712
