Two Mothers.

[Bullseye]

I agree if the jury had that information, stocky man following [Name removed], medical history and mother lied then it may have caused reasonable doubt for some of the jury members.

Stocky man has now been named and information about him put out in public. Now we are seeing people make their mind up he is guilty based on this information alone. Bit like people did with Luke and the news reports. I think if his face and name had not been splashed all over the papers with some of the stories the reported and the trial had been held out of Edinburgh we may have seen a different result but we will never know and seems the appeal courts did not agree.

[Mr Apples]

I agree if the jury had that information, stocky man following [Name removed], medical history and mother lied then it may have caused reasonable doubt for some of the jury members.

Stocky man has now been named and information about him put out in public. Now we are seeing people make their mind up he is guilty based on this information alone. Bit like people did with Luke and the news reports. I think if his face and name had not been splashed all over the papers with some of the stories the reported and the trial had been held out of Edinburgh we may have seen a different result but we will never know and seems the appeal courts did not agree.

Garbage! Even if Josj was the one being tried for murder, he still would not have been found guilty, imo. Why? There would not have been enough evidence to convict him. Nowhere near 20 points of circumstantial evidence like there was against LM.

[Bullseye]

Garbage! Even if Josj was the one being tried for murder, he still would not have been found guilty, imo. Why? There would not have been enough evidence to convict him. Nowhere near 20 points of circumstantial evidence like there was against LM.

Some lawyers use the possibility of another suspect to try to cause reasonable doubt, that info might have done that.

I don’t think josj did it either. But as he was not a suspect we don’t know how many pieces of circumstantial evidence could have been found against him or even hard evidence so we don’t know if there would have been enough to convict him or not. Him or anyone else.

[Mr Apples]

Clutching at straws, imo. You and FL are hewn from the same hopeless rock.

[faithlilly]

Proficiently?? Hyperbolic, is it not? Are you on the naughty stuff tonight? So, provide examples of Judith's many lies outwith her lies to Josj's mental health team so he could smoke cannabis? I think Judith would've known if her son was a potential killer, so it's no biggie her lying about her son not being able to attend appointments with his mental health team. Btw, did Josj have a criminal history in 2003?

Far be it for me to point out something that should be staring you in the face but if the two independent witnesses that came forward about Stocky Man are correct then JuJ must also have lied about the alibi she gave her son.

Did the individual above have a criminal record in 2003….no idea. Did Luke?

[Parky41]

Far be it for me to point out the blatant obvious but liars and manipulators who pose questions based upon lies and manipulation have no place anywhere. Unless of course they are to each other, ones who live in the same head space? Just a thought.

Now we take something simple that smacks you between the eyes stamped - LIARS. Not at all hard to do. Lean and her version of the same person is 'the witness was sure of the time being 5:10pm' to Forbes and 'the time was 4:50pm.' Shall we have more?

Forbes and his video, they (stocky man and Jodi were seen right there by the garage) where there, is just feet from the path entrance at of course 4:50pm. FW a few days, then they were no longer there but that Jodi 'may' have walked down into Lothian drive, nowhere near the garage nor lane. To Lean and 'there was no evidence whatsoever of the route Jodi had taken ------' To down through the scheme, or along to the lane, or indeed past the entrance and up on to Morris Road.

These two people from a media appeal, let us talk about them. The mystery male, and we do not count the sensationalist headlines, have a word. We go to the article which was around what appeared good, appeared to be the first positive, "possible" sighting of the school girl on the Easthouses Road. Seen between the bus stops on both sides of the road, something just a little off, however, IF this had been around 5pm on the day Jodi had died, IF it had been that girl, then two people were important to trace, as;

One was walking behind that girl in the same direction, one was walking face on to both, walking past, up close and personal to both the girl who may 'possibly' have been Jodi, and of course the mystery male. An appeal for them to come forward, to clarify time, day and the hope they could give a positive ID of the school girl.

Now we revert back to the day of the murder and the following few days, the media reports of the murder, and no girl with any pushchair came forward, neither did the mystery male and neither did the two people mentioned in the appeal. We know this, for statements are timed and dated and Lean uses guesswork around when they 'may' have come forward based upon wording in the appeal.

So, in brief with all the guesswork, the manipulation, around time, of when, why, where and what - The two people, the male and female with pushchair did not come forward straight after the murder, for neither had seen that school girl around 5pm on the 30th of June. - Fact.

Two people, one who did know the school girl by sight saw her after getting off the bus, the time confirmed of that sighting was just after 4pm. A neighbour saw the girl walk past their window, she had went down off the Easthouses road, along Parkhead Place, the time confirmed as 4:10pm, the school girl was making her way home from school that day.

So, we take a big melting pot and we jumble everything around, we morph several pieces of information together, little slithering's of truth, combine them to put out something completely false!

For, those with actual sense, who actually attempt to decipher and analyse information, place the absolute obvious, the fact - That IF there had been any positive identification made of that schoolgirl around 5pm on that road, the witness would have been used at court to show the schoolgirls last movements, walking along that road to go and meet with LM. To tie in with the AB sighing. That hope that if it was her, that the male, IF, IF, IF and bloody IF again had continued along that road behind her, IF he had not walked down through the scheme or into any house, he may possibly have seen Jodi Jones meet with LM.

So the marvellous two "independent" people who came forward after the reconstruction, plucked a memory and an identity was made of a male who had not been around on the 30th of June, around 5pm. The weeks pass and a funeral takes place, and one calls the cops, to say they 'think again' that they may have seen the male. No statement taken, no formal identifications, nothing, because there was no Jodi Jones around 5pm walking along that road, it had been a false trail, deflated hope.

To Lean again, surprise surprise - This person said (did they really?) that they had seen males dressed the same, closely grouped together, just like a proper identity parade should be, to implant a vision of 6-8 people huddled together dressed the same, side by side, and bingo they picked the mystery male, again. To the carrying the coffin saga, to people saying they had pictures of the brother doing just that, carrying his sisters coffin - No, No, No, one must not say that now, so she changed it again!! To say that they had only saw footage on the TV, and in that footage there were many males all over the place and from that she 'thinks she may have' saw her mystery male - So not like any blood proper identity parade at all, she has been spouting bollocks as per usual, to try and add weight, any weight to back up a false narrative.

So, no, it is NOT common knowledge who that mystery male is, it is ONLY common knowledge who liars and manipulators try to push him as. To suit a cause, that cause for their imaginary greater good! An over the phone few words, over five people seeing Mitchell that day out and about in places he claimed never to have been - Have a word! So, there is no, the brother was out and about when he was supposed to be at home. He was home, exactly where a family, who were nothing but honest with the police in a murder investigation placed him.

That girl with the pushchair, whom Lean states, when she was eventually traced, simply said she saw nothing, indeed, not around 5pm on the 30th of June she did not, did she now? Very much the reason one would imagine that she did not recognize it as being her they were trying to find.

So all in all, there are no two imaginary mothers, both given any false alibi, one blatantly lying to the police where the other just had to tell the truth according to Faith. There is only someone in a thorough investigation, who could NOT be eliminated.

[faithlilly]

Far be it for me to point out the blatant obvious but liars and manipulators who pose questions based upon lies and manipulation have no place anywhere. Unless of course they are to each other, ones who live in the same head space? Just a thought.

Now we take something simple that smacks you between the eyes stamped - LIARS. Not at all hard to do. Lean and her version of the same person is 'the witness was sure of the time being 5:10pm' to Forbes and 'the time was 4:50pm.' Shall we have more?

Forbes and his video, they (stocky man and Jodi were seen right there by the garage) where there, is just feet from the path entrance at of course 4:50pm. FW a few days, then they were no longer there but that Jodi 'may' have walked down into Lothian drive, nowhere near the garage nor lane. To Lean and 'there was no evidence whatsoever of the route Jodi had taken ------' To down through the scheme, or along to the lane, or indeed past the entrance and up on to Morris Road.

These two people from a media appeal, let us talk about them. The mystery male, and we do not count the sensationalist headlines, have a word. We go to the article which was around what appeared good, appeared to be the first positive, "possible" sighting of the school girl on the Easthouses Road. Seen between the bus stops on both sides of the road, something just a little off, however, IF this had been around 5pm on the day Jodi had died, IF it had been that girl, then two people were important to trace, as;

One was walking behind that girl in the same direction, one was walking face on to both, walking past, up close and personal to both the girl who may 'possibly' have been Jodi, and of course the mystery male. An appeal for them to come forward, to clarify time, day and the hope they could give a positive ID of the school girl.

Now we revert back to the day of the murder and the following few days, the media reports of the murder, and no girl with any pushchair came forward, neither did the mystery male and neither did the two people mentioned in the appeal. We know this, for statements are timed and dated and Lean uses guesswork around when they 'may' have come forward based upon wording in the appeal.

So, in brief with all the guesswork, the manipulation, around time, of when, why, where and what - The two people, the male and female with pushchair did not come forward straight after the murder, for neither had seen that school girl around 5pm on the 30th of June. - Fact.

Two people, one who did know the school girl by sight saw her after getting off the bus, the time confirmed of that sighting was just after 4pm. A neighbour saw the girl walk past their window, she had went down off the Easthouses road, along Parkhead Place, the time confirmed as 4:10pm, the school girl was making her way home from school that day.

So, we take a big melting pot and we jumble everything around, we morph several pieces of information together, little slithering's of truth, combine them to put out something completely false!

For, those with actual sense, who actually attempt to decipher and analyse information, place the absolute obvious, the fact - That IF there had been any positive identification made of that schoolgirl around 5pm on that road, the witness would have been used at court to show the schoolgirls last movements, walking along that road to go and meet with LM. To tie in with the AB sighing. That hope that if it was her, that the male, IF, IF, IF and bloody IF again had continued along that road behind her, IF he had not walked down through the scheme or into any house, he may possibly have seen Jodi Jones meet with LM.

So the marvellous two "independent" people who came forward after the reconstruction, plucked a memory and an identity was made of a male who had not been around on the 30th of June, around 5pm. The weeks pass and a funeral takes place, and one calls the cops, to say they 'think again' that they may have seen the male. No statement taken, no formal identifications, nothing, because there was no Jodi Jones around 5pm walking along that road, it had been a false trail, deflated hope.

To Lean again, surprise surprise - This person said (did they really?) that they had seen males dressed the same, closely grouped together, just like a proper identity parade should be, to implant a vision of 6-8 people huddled together dressed the same, side by side, and bingo they picked the mystery male, again. To the carrying the coffin saga, to people saying they had pictures of the brother doing just that, carrying his sisters coffin - No, No, No, one must not say that now, so she changed it again!! To say that they had only saw footage on the TV, and in that footage there were many males all over the place and from that she 'thinks she may have' saw her mystery male - So not like any blood proper identity parade at all, she has been spouting bollocks as per usual, to try and add weight, any weight to back up a false narrative.

So, no, it is NOT common knowledge who that mystery male is, it is ONLY common knowledge who liars and manipulators try to push him as. To suit a cause, that cause for their imaginary greater good! An over the phone few words, over five people seeing Mitchell that day out and about in places he claimed never to have been - Have a word! So, there is no, the brother was out and about when he was supposed to be at home. He was home, exactly where a family, who were nothing but honest with the police in a murder investigation placed him.

That girl with the pushchair, whom Lean states, when she was eventually traced, simply said she saw nothing, indeed, not around 5pm on the 30th of June she did not, did she now? Very much the reason one would imagine that she did not recognize it as being her they were trying to find.

So all in all, there are no two imaginary mothers, both given any false alibi, one blatantly lying to the police where the other just had to tell the truth according to Faith. There is only someone in a thorough investigation, who could NOT be eliminated.

One thing that the Stocky Man sighting tells us is that 17 days into the investigation, and at a time when L&B had JuJ’s statements regarding Jodi’s movements that afternoon, and also AB’s statements the police believed Jodi could have been walking towards RDP at 5pm. Where does this leave the ‘Jodi’ who was seen at 4.49pm at the entrance to the path with ‘Luke’. Two witnesses with almost the same description, a description which matched Jodi, had seen the girl 10 minutes after the alleged AB sighting. Of course at that time AB’s sighting was too late to be Luke and Jodi..it was just one sighting of many from kind people wishing to help. When that changed we can only guess but change it did.

And what of the funeral identification? 6-8 man huddled together, all dressed the same and yet the witness picks out a particular individual. Of all the men at the funeral the witness picks out the individual who just happens to suffer from psychosis and paranoia….what are the chances? The individual who only weeks before had attacked family members with a knife…would you believe it? The individual whose only alibi is his mother and even then she has him eating dinner in his room while he has himself at the table with, coincidentally, Jodi. Stranger and stranger. Of course by the time of Jodi’s funeral Luke is well and truly in the frame, no turning back now.

One question…why didn’t Jodi’s brother appear in court?

[Parky41]

One thing that the Stocky Man sighting tells us is that 17 days into the investigation, and at a time when L&B had JuJ’s statements regarding Jodi’s movements that afternoon, and also AB’s statements the police believed Jodi could have been walking towards RDP at 5pm. Where does this leave the ‘Jodi’ who was seen at 4.49pm at the entrance to the path with ‘Luke’. Two witnesses with almost the same description, a description which matched Jodi, had seen the girl 10 minutes after the alleged AB sighting. Of course at that time AB’s sighting was too late to be Luke and Jodi..it was just one sighting of many from kind people wishing to help. When that changed we can only guess but change it did.

And what of the funeral identification? 6-8 man huddled together, all dressed the same and yet the witness picks out a particular individual. Of all the men at the funeral the witness picks out the individual who just happens to suffer from psychosis and paranoia….what are the chances? The individual who only weeks before had attacked family members with a knife…would you believe it? The individual whose only alibi is his mother and even then she has him eating dinner in his room while he has himself at the table with, coincidentally, Jodi. Stranger and stranger. Of course by the time of Jodi’s funeral Luke is well and truly in the frame, no turning back now.

One question…why didn’t Jodi’s brother appear in court?

I do love simple questions - And the opportunity to highlight more deception, as per my other post. Did not appear as one would not have been cited to appear, and if not cited then usually because there was no value to being a witness.

All in one, from a family who were honest in a murder investigation into one of their own, their daughter/sister. Who by being honest had only one aim, to be open and not hinder that investigation in the slightest. It does not matter what slant you apply, the only thing that counts, is that word - Truth.

Four people are at home and one leaves, three remain having dinner together at what was of course that crucial time. Two people who had value as witnesses, one of whom had to testify, there was footage being used of him on CCTV around ascertaining the time of that person leaving home, the phone call with Mitchell and so forth, the other person the victims mother. So, two people with value as witnesses in more than one area. There was no requirement for a third around the victim leaving when two where already testifying to this. He held no other value.

And as per my other post and many other posts besides that - I am not interested in something, that without the slightest bit of doubt has been manipulated to hell and back dear. Kindred spirits who's only intention is to deceive for some imaginary greater good, which all comes down to attention, for the accused/convicted and for their own egotistic natures?

Shall we have another now since you want to discuss "mothers" - A mother gave a false account to the police and she tried her best to stick to that false account, a false account to place her son home. And we simply apply here that it was blown wide open as being false, also that five people and not just one saw Mitchell in places he claimed not to have been.

Now we go to what is doing the rounds yet again, we apply SF's take on it "That Luke had been stripped and forensically examined within an hour of discovery" From, without doubt CM herself to her voice piece (her description) in 2003. 'That by the time of her arrival at the station her son had been stripped and examined---' Now let us add further context to tie in with the above.

It is/was said that she had been told to make her way to the local station for ease of access due to being a 10min walk from the home, or short drive by car, the police could not have known, that her nor SM could drive to the station - Where was SM?

That one had grabbed shoes and coat and ran like the wind to get there, cover that 10min walk. What time would you apply here for that son to be stripped and forensically examined by the time of her arrival? However -------

To her surprise a car pulls over to speak with her on Newbattle Road and her son is in it, rolling down the window and she stated matter of fact "Jodi's dead!" aware fully of the girls death yet had not discussed any discovery with her son. She then asked "Is he under arrest?" further adding that, not only did one know the girl was dead but that it was suspicious?

But we are here highlighting that fable for effect, still pushed out for the same effect - That the son had been stripped and examined before she had a chance to be with him. This stopping on Newbattle road had that distance even less, one had in fact then arrived directly behind her son, a couple of minutes max - To have been stripped and examined all over, really?

Now we tie this together, a false account given for alibi, handed over on a plate for the time they knew it was needed for, before the police had even begun to ascertain when that young girl had left home. To knowing the girl was dead, to instantly believing her son would be arrested for that death, to then making things up for effect around being stripped and examined upon her arrival? - Where yet again when Ms Lean discovered the truth, knew that could not possibly have been true, still pushes it out for the same effect, knowing that the majority of people who will read her story will take no time to actually analyse or question anything, that blind faith - Do they now?

And again, highlighting reason (the realistic reasons) why suspicion fell upon LM, remained there, why he could not be eliminated, charged, tried and convicted - Is for, as it always had been, to show reality here, the utter nonsense that the police had tunnel vision and sought to fit that lad up. When most of the suspicion came directly from themselves. And as my hypotheses highlights, people can naturally have doubt around capability, more so around those time factors from 4:50pm until seen at 5:40pm, then again touching 6pm. - It does not cancel out everything else, it does not equate to there being no evidence, not in the slightest. It does not give him alibi and it sure as hell does not cancel out the absolute fact he knew where that young girls body was - Reality of time of setting off together as four, around 6mins - Have a word, and again, an area that is manipulated to hell to hide that absolute fact! From people who it is second nature to do so with? 



 

[Nicholas]

Now we go to what is doing the rounds yet again, we apply SF's take on it "That Luke had been stripped and forensically examined within an hour of discovery" From, without doubt CM herself to her voice piece (her description) in 2003. 'That by the time of her arrival at the station her son had been stripped and examined---' Now let us add further context to tie in with the above.

It is/was said that she had been told to make her way to the local station for ease of access due to being a 10min walk from the home, or short drive by car, the police could not have known, that her nor SM could drive to the station - Where was SM?

That one had grabbed shoes and coat and ran like the wind to get there, cover that 10min walk. What time would you apply here for that son to be stripped and forensically examined by the time of her arrival? However -------

Did you mean her 2011 nonsense here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UbHl3oCCClI

What was the exact time doctor Kranti Hiremath arrived at the police station?

More on doctor Kranti Hiremath here
👇
http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/09/17/warped-minded-abuser-gaslighter-con-artist-hypocrite-scott-forbes-his-blatant-lies-part-64/

[Nicholas]

Did you mean her 2011 nonsense here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UbHl3oCCClI

Do all the people who posted comments on Billy Middleton’s (wronglyaccusedperson) video above know about this

Unconvicted Child Killer, Abuser & Predator Billy Middleton - Part 18b

http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/08/30/quite-a-hall-tale-part-18c%ef%b8%8f/

Twisted Reciprocal Relationships – Part 18c

https://wordpress.com/post/theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/16149

Partners In Crime: Abusers Sandra Lean & Billy Middleton & The WAP Org - Part 18i

http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/12/15/further-sandra-leans-fabricated-phd-should-be-revoked-part-18i%ef%b8%8f/

[Nicholas]

Do all the people who posted comments on Billy Middleton’s (wronglyaccusedperson) video above know about this

Unconvicted Child Killer, Abuser & Predator Billy Middleton - Part 18b

http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/08/30/quite-a-hall-tale-part-18c%ef%b8%8f/

Twisted Reciprocal Relationships – Part 18c

https://wordpress.com/post/theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/16149

Partners In Crime: Abusers Sandra Lean & Billy Middleton & The WAP Org - Part 18i

http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/12/15/further-sandra-leans-fabricated-phd-should-be-revoked-part-18i%ef%b8%8f/

You can hear Sandra Lean speak to and laugh with her then boyfriend un-convicted baby killer Billy Middleton here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SgU0w48jyi8 at around 02:27

This was around the time Sandra Lean claimed she was carrying out ‘research’ for her fraudulent PhD

You can hear baby killer Billy Middleton singing too (02:18/03:13-14) and Sandra Lean laughing and speaking (02:28)

This was on the last Tuesday (26th) in January of 2010

In March 2010 Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton were in London and attended killer Simon Hall’s pre appeal hearing

Sounds like baby killer Billy Middleton mentioned the ‘bus’ too - they were travelling around in an old Royal Mail post office van around the time

Sandra Lean’s distinctive laugh again at around 03:48

[Nicholas]

You can hear Sandra Lean speak to and laugh with her then boyfriend un-convicted baby killer Billy Middleton here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=SgU0w48jyi8 at around 02:27

This was around the time Sandra Lean claimed she was carrying out ‘research’ for her fraudulent PhD

You can hear baby killer Billy Middleton singing too (02:18/03:13-14) and Sandra Lean laughing and speaking (02:28)

This was on the last Tuesday (26th) in January of 2010

In March 2010 Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton were in London and attended killer Simon Hall’s pre appeal hearing

Sounds like baby killer Billy Middleton mentioned the ‘bus’ too - they were travelling around in an old Royal Mail post office van around the time

Sandra Lean’s distinctive laugh again at around 03:48

Un-convicted baby killer Billy Middleton can be heard in Part 3 too at around 0:31 and 01:24

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aFfekRvsP88