Author Topic: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!  (Read 46375 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #105 on: March 12, 2021, 03:18:17 PM »
Sandra Lean states here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg453782.html#msg453782

I've answered this question with one of my own repeatedly for over 16 years now. Why would I, a mother of two girls around Jodi's age who lived right on the doorstep of this terrible murder, fight to free someone I thought for one minute could be guilty of it? To risk having someone who could have been capable of such brutality released into the community where my own daughters lived their lives? I didn't know the Mitchell family or the Jones family at the time, so let me ask you, why do you think I did what I did, from the very beginning and have kept doing pretty much ever since? To suggest I'd lie in order to achieve that end is utterly ludicrous.

Why did Sandra Lean move Billy Middleton in with her and her daughter? - the man who according to Sandra - left smoking cigarette ends in her ashtrays at night before bed
« Last Edit: March 12, 2021, 03:22:05 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #106 on: March 12, 2021, 05:23:30 PM »
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg384557.html#msg384557
Sandra Lean wrote:
"Entering a local store this evening, I was approached by a man who greeted me with the following:

 “You are one f*cking sick little bitch. How long did you think folk were going to take your lies and p*sh? Weren’t happy destroying one family’s life, eh? Now you’ve started on somebody else’s. How many more you twisted little f*ck? Yours is coming, don’t you worry about it. You’ll get yours you twisted little c**t – there’s plenty just waiting their chance.”

I assume this came about as a result of various claims being made on various websites. In principle, I would not back down to such bullying and threatening behaviour. However, I have to live here, as do my family, and in view of the fact that Simon’s appeal is imminent, it is with a very heavy heart that I have asked Billy to remove everything relating to Simon’s case from the site.http://forum.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk/series-on-cases-from-sandra-leans-book-no-smoke/re-simon-hall-wrongly-convicted-of-murder/

Sandra Lean said:
""The public opinion was so much against Luke Mitchell and the Mitchell family that to start speaking in support and start questioning things has been risky," admits Sandra.

I was in a shop recently, talking to someone I know when another woman came in. The person I was speaking to mentioned that I'd been looking at the Luke Mitchell case, and this other woman - you know the kind, knuckles scrapping on the floor - turned and growled something like: 'Well, you'd just better watch yourself'."

There have been other, even more worrying incidents which Sandra prefers not to discuss publicly. Yet she is so driven to lift the lid on what she sees as fundamental flaws in the justice system which have sent Mitchell to jail for 20 years, that she's prepared to take the flak: "I'll just not shop in that shop for a while," she shrugs.
http://truthinjustice.org/no-smoke.htm



Another broken link http://truthinjustice.org/no-smoke.htm

https://www.scotsman.com/arts-and-culture/books/claiming-killer-innocent-part-of-search-for-truth-1-1316853

Same broken link as the one from the wiki page here ⬇️

Interestingly wiki refers to ‘No Smoke’ by Sandra Lean but there appears to be no mention of Douglas Richard Binstead’s book ‘A Very Cumbrian Murder: The Tragic Story of the Lady in the Lake’ on the case

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_in_the_Lake_trial

Sandra Lean claimed in October 2019 she had withdrawn her book ‘No Smoke’ but it appears this may not have been the case

I've contacted the publisher today to ask for the book to be withdrawn’

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg456199.html#msg456199

At reference 50 in the wiki link above it states,

Dick, Sandra (2007-05-09). "Claiming killer innocent part of search for truth". Edinburgh Evening News. Retrieved 2007-07-02’

Interestingly clicking on the link leads to ‘truthinjustice.org’ coming soon page
« Last Edit: March 12, 2021, 05:30:10 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #107 on: March 16, 2021, 01:13:07 PM »
Sandra Lean said:
""The public opinion was so much against Luke Mitchell and the Mitchell family that to start speaking in support and start questioning things has been risky," admits Sandra.

I was in a shop recently, talking to someone I know when another woman came in. The person I was speaking to mentioned that I'd been looking at the Luke Mitchell case, and this other woman - you know the kind, knuckles scrapping on the floor - turned and growled something like: 'Well, you'd just better watch yourself'."

There have been other, even more worrying incidents which Sandra prefers not to discuss publicly. Yet she is so driven to lift the lid on what she sees as fundamental flaws in the justice system which have sent Mitchell to jail for 20 years, that she's prepared to take the flak: "I'll just not shop in that shop for a while," she shrugs.
http://truthinjustice.org/no-smoke.htm[/color]


Another broken link http://truthinjustice.org/no-smoke.htm

At reference 50 in the wiki link above it states,

Dick, Sandra (2007-05-09). "Claiming killer innocent part of search for truth". Edinburgh Evening News. Retrieved 2007-07-02’

Interestingly clicking on the link leads to ‘truthinjustice.org’ coming soon page

Does anyone know who set up the truthinjustice.org ?

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10370.msg644508#msg644508

And does anyone know who edited the wiki pages?

I noticed someone asked Sandra Lean’s daughter about this around a year ago on her YouTube channel

was it (the truthinjustice.org site) and wiki edits linked to Sandra Leans publisher Checkpoint press/Stephen T Manning?
« Last Edit: March 16, 2021, 02:00:11 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline John

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #108 on: March 16, 2021, 02:47:34 PM »
Sandra Lean
@SandraLean5
Luke Mitchell - fourteen, fitted up and forgotten. It's time for the truth. Profits to Long Road to Justice - a new organisation being set up to help wrongly accused and convicted.
8:29 AM · Apr 2, 2019·Twitter Web Client

Scott Forbes
@Scf65Forbes
Apr 2, 2019
Replying to
@SandraLean5
Anyone reading the Facts of this case will realise 100%That Mitchell was set up to cover up police incompetence...incompetence of a criminal standard. Police showed a total disregard for law and justice and total disrespect to Jodie Jones and family#set#up

https://mobile.twitter.com/SandraLean5/status/1112980356695756800


There’s no evidence Luke Mitchell was ‘fitted up’ as Sandra Lean claims.

You're spot on Nicky.

Scott Forbes is an idiot. What sort of plonker tries to suck £50 grand out of the press for a fairy tale?

Poor wretch Mark Kane paid the ultimate price though and is yet another victim of this witch-hunt.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2021, 02:50:16 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline John

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #109 on: March 16, 2021, 02:51:52 PM »
Why did Sandra Lean move Billy Middleton in with her and her daughter? - the man who according to Sandra - left smoking cigarette ends in her ashtrays at night before bed

I know why but I can't say publicly unfortunately.   $65*

I must say I've got to laugh after watching her latest Facebook live effort.  She never answers the real questions, just reiterates the same old...same old. Nothing new has ever come out of any investigation carried out by Sandra Lean.

The campaign followers are fed all this garbage about new evidence and withheld documents etc...  What a load of bull!
« Last Edit: March 16, 2021, 02:58:43 PM by John »
A malicious prosecution for a crime which never existed. An exposé of egregious malfeasance by public officials.
Indeed, the truth never changes with the passage of time.

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #110 on: March 16, 2021, 02:55:48 PM »
I know why but I can't say publicly unfortunately.   $65*

Sandra Lean states here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg453782.html#msg453782

I've answered this question with one of my own repeatedly for over 16 years now. Why would I, a mother of two girls around Jodi's age who lived right on the doorstep of this terrible murder, fight to free someone I thought for one minute could be guilty of it? To risk having someone who could have been capable of such brutality released into the community where my own daughters lived their lives? I didn't know the Mitchell family or the Jones family at the time, so let me ask you, why do you think I did what I did, from the very beginning and have kept doing pretty much ever since? To suggest I'd lie in order to achieve that end is utterly ludicrous.


Sandra Lean went on to refer to the “Simon” she gave a dedication to in her book ‘No Smoke as a “psychopath.”

.....and to Skooby, Chi, Caz and Simon

Why?

What made Sandra Lean believe him to be a psychopath?

And WHY did she go into partnership with Billy Middleton after he’d showed his true colours to her?

A risk taker is a person who is willing to do things that involve danger or risk in order to achieve a goal.

Thing is John it wasn’t just Billy Middleton who ‘visited’ with Sandra Lean it seems?

This statement ‘Why would I, a mother of two girls around Jodi's age who lived right on the doorstep of this terrible murder, fight to free someone I thought for one minute could be guilty of it? is meaningless from my viewpoint - especially following Sandra’s comments on the exposure of Simon Hall’s guilt

As is this, ’To risk having someone who could have been capable of such brutality released into the community where my own daughters lived their lives?’

For me the Billy Middleton ‘incident’ is evidence of the contrary

I recall a meeting with Dr Michael Naughton at Bristol university where the news on Billy Middleton’s case was discussed

« Last Edit: March 16, 2021, 03:09:31 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #111 on: March 16, 2021, 03:21:14 PM »
I know why but I can't say publicly unfortunately.   $65*

Apparently Sandra Lean resigned from the WronglyAccusedPersonOrg in April 2013 but my question to her would be - didn’t this ⬇️ set off any alarm bells?

Billy Middleton AKA Nugnug:

Billy spent much of his home time on the computer. Kareen was sure he was in contact with other women. She looked up the history on their computer one day Billy was at work and found that he had googled "rape", "torture" and "p***y fisting". Billy had been visiting hardcore BDSM sites and Kareen was scared - is this what he had in mind for her?
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg385712.html#msg385712

And what do her adult daughters make of it all?
« Last Edit: March 16, 2021, 03:26:14 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #112 on: March 18, 2021, 04:29:10 PM »
https://insidetime.org/truth-justice-certainty-and-finality/

Sandra Lean
Quote
One of the things I’ve seen over and over in the last 12 years is those fighting injustice being accused of “selective interpretation” of the facts to support claims of innocence. Yet, as we see here, often those making such accusations are doing exactly that – selectively choosing which points they will claim as “facts” to accuse those locked in a desperate and oftentimes apparently impossible battle for justice

Good for the goose? Which is why I am trying to pick up on 'selective interpretation' Would be a losing battle if I were to try and engage in some pointless debate, when, I (someone who holds, not, every single piece of documentation)Savvy enough perhaps, to notice the holes in even the basic particles of misinformation given. Witnessing (disgracefully) in forums of past and present, the response, that any negative towards innocence produces. A professional body, acting in childish, foolish taunts. "be afraid, be very afraid"  I underlinded the above, as, inadvertantly, meaningfully, cleverly or simply, it is up to the reader/viewer what it paints. There are no accusations to parties a,b,c ,d,e and so forth, the childish cry of 'not my fault if it incurs consequences towards innocents, I didn't make them do it'. (The blame game)

"Innocents Betrayed "    Are the innocents in the case of Luke Mitchell being portrayed as guilty? From the very first officer who arrived on the scene that night, blasted as a liar?

Sandra Lean states:
”So, to take a hypothetical example, in a murder case where the victim was killed by a stab wound to the chest,”


Her “hypothetical example” being the Sean Toal case and hopes no one will notice she’s been caught out AGAIN

“A hypothetical example is a fictional example that can be used when a speaker is explaining a complicated topic that makes the most sense when it is put into more realistic or relatable terms.

Maybe next time she should request all comment on her articles are closed down before being published

What it “paints” is see through and has been for a long time now

⬆️
« Last Edit: March 18, 2021, 04:32:34 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #113 on: March 18, 2021, 06:05:28 PM »
Sandra Lean states here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg453782.html#msg453782

I've answered this question with one of my own repeatedly for over 16 years now. Why would I, a mother of two girls around Jodi's age who lived right on the doorstep of this terrible murder, fight to free someone I thought for one minute could be guilty of it? To risk having someone who could have been capable of such brutality released into the community where my own daughters lived their lives? I didn't know the Mitchell family or the Jones family at the time, so let me ask you, why do you think I did what I did, from the very beginning and have kept doing pretty much ever since? To suggest I'd lie in order to achieve that end is utterly ludicrous.

Is the above a true statement?

I was under the impression only one of the girls (Now grown women) lived with Sandra Lean ?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #114 on: March 18, 2021, 06:26:57 PM »
Sandra Lean states here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg453782.html#msg453782

I've answered this question with one of my own repeatedly for over 16 years now. Why would I, a mother of two girls around Jodi's age who lived right on the doorstep of this terrible murder, fight to free someone I thought for one minute could be guilty of it? To risk having someone who could have been capable of such brutality released into the community where my own daughters lived their lives? I didn't know the Mitchell family or the Jones family at the time, so let me ask you, why do you think I did what I did, from the very beginning and have kept doing pretty much ever since? To suggest I'd lie in order to achieve that end is utterly ludicrous.

To forward her career, for money, for fame, for power or for the thrill of getting one over on the criminal justice system?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #115 on: April 27, 2021, 07:20:17 PM »
Thing is John it wasn’t just Billy Middleton who ‘visited’ with Sandra Lean it seems?

This statement ‘Why would I, a mother of two girls around Jodi's age who lived right on the doorstep of this terrible murder, fight to free someone I thought for one minute could be guilty of it? is meaningless from my viewpoint - especially following Sandra’s comments on the exposure of Simon Hall’s guilt

As is this, ’To risk having someone who could have been capable of such brutality released into the community where my own daughters lived their lives?’

For me the Billy Middleton ‘incident’ is evidence of the contrary

I recall a meeting with Dr Michael Naughton at Bristol university where the news on Billy Middleton’s case was discussed

‘Lived their lives’

Where were Sandra Leans two daughters living at the time of Jodi’s murder?

or

Did both Sandra’s daughters live with her at the time?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Parky41

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #116 on: April 27, 2021, 08:02:50 PM »
Quote
As is this, ’To risk having someone who could have been capable of such brutality released into the community where my own daughters lived their lives?’

It is meaningless - As Ms Lean was well entangled with CM long before LM was arrested. I simply do not buy into this tale of two complete strangers meeting in 2003. There is not a fraction of it that rings true IMO, as it does with many others. A mother of two daughters whom had absolutely no way of knowing at this point, if the suspicion, only at that point upon LM was founded. One stranger, a mother of boy who is very much a suspect does not look up a complete stranger on the basis of air? Whilst another with two young daughters would become entailed suddenly with the mother of a boy suspected of murdering his girlfriend. This claimed first meeting, was in September 2003. LM was arrested in April 2004. "No Smoke" was released in 2007 which is flawed from start to finish with this case.

Furthermore the statement above is completely empty - It is empty as there is absolutely nothing of risk in the above as to what Ms Lean has done or does do. Ms Leans many claims have absolutely no basis of foundation in proving LM to be innocent. She can not explain in the slightest any of LM's actions on that evening as being credible. If there was anything at all solid in these assumptions, they would not be assumptions in the first place. There would be no speculation and innuendo. There is however plenty of scope for bias and impartiality, even if this friendship had only begun in September 2003

An example of this, is the ban on using this path alone. - Ms Lean could release multiple areas, verbatim from this girls mothers statements to show it to be false. She can not. For surely the key, the reasons and the time of this ban taking place, would be in Jodi's mothers statements. There appears to be no dispute of the fact that this girl had walked this path alone on occasion - it is when this ban took place and why? What were the reasons for it? And of course the many other witness's to this fact. The snip bits that are used do not prove that LM did not know or of his claims to hang around for the best part of two hours. That he did know, with absolute certainty how isolated this path was. That he is the one claiming she was walking this isolated path alone. That it is not at all feasible, in the slightest to accept that he had simply hung around on Newbattle R'd. There is absolutely no proof that he did so. 

Another example is that of the search party.  - Remember here that the claim is that all of this search party had walked some distance passed this V . Ms Lean, yet again could release the areas of these statements verbatim that show this clear wording. She does not as she can't, for it is not there. The search party talk of this dog at the V - When actual context is put alongside this, of where both Luke and his dog were. It completely wipes out the story of the dog finding Jodi. For they had not all walked passed this V and LM certainly had not. And If, and that is a mighty big IF, he had even stepped a couple of feet passed this V - It does not explain in the slightest the ease of which he handled this, claimed strange, unfamiliar territory. That he had been over this V mere seconds. No trepidation, nothing. This is the very reason DF did not choose to go down foolish routes of bringing in dog experts. It was completely unnecessary and unfounded.  He knew what was in those statements, from the off. Yes, he did ask about the dog and of what it had been doing, but is was at the V.  Remember here also, that initial look into the woodland at the 'Gino' break. No dog, no nothing. He introduced the woodland into the search. This woodland that he claimed never to have been in prior to that evening. And of course, we are talking around 10mins here. From the point of the search party meeting. Remarkable, isn't it. Impossible? - It was certainly proven to be.

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #117 on: April 27, 2021, 08:13:31 PM »
It is meaningless - As Ms Lean was well entangled with CM long before LM was arrested. I simply do not buy into this tale of two complete strangers meeting in 2003. There is not a fraction of it that rings true IMO, as it does with many others. A mother of two daughters whom had absolutely no way of knowing at this point, if the suspicion, only at that point upon LM was founded. One stranger, a mother of boy who is very much a suspect does not look up a complete stranger on the basis of air? Whilst another with two young daughters would become entailed suddenly with the mother of a boy suspected of murdering his girlfriend. This claimed first meeting, was in September 2003. LM was arrested in April 2004. "No Smoke" was released in 2007 which is flawed from start to finish with this case.

Furthermore the statement above is completely empty - It is empty as there is absolutely nothing of risk in the above as to what Ms Lean has done or does do. Ms Leans many claims have absolutely no basis of foundation in proving LM to be innocent. She can not explain in the slightest any of LM's actions on that evening as being credible. If there was anything at all solid in these assumptions, they would not be assumptions in the first place. There would be no speculation and innuendo. There is however plenty of scope for bias and impartiality, even if this friendship had only begun in September 2003

An example of this, is the ban on using this path alone. - Ms Lean could release multiple areas, verbatim from this girls mothers statements to show it to be false. She can not. For surely the key, the reasons and the time of this ban taking place, would be in Jodi's mothers statements. There appears to be no dispute of the fact that this girl had walked this path alone on occasion - it is when this ban took place and why? What were the reasons for it? And of course the many other witness's to this fact. The snip bits that are used do not prove that LM did not know or of his claims to hang around for the best part of two hours. That he did know, with absolute certainty how isolated this path was. That he is the one claiming she was walking this isolated path alone. That it is not at all feasible, in the slightest to accept that he had simply hung around on Newbattle R'd. There is absolutely no proof that he did so. 

Another example is that of the search party.  - Remember here that the claim is that all of this search party had walked some distance passed this V . Ms Lean, yet again could release the areas of these statements verbatim that show this clear wording. She does not as she can't, for it is not there. The search party talk of this dog at the V - When actual context is put alongside this, of where both Luke and his dog were. It completely wipes out the story of the dog finding Jodi. For they had not all walked passed this V and LM certainly had not. And If, and that is a mighty big IF, he had even stepped a couple of feet passed this V - It does not explain in the slightest the ease of which he handled this, claimed strange, unfamiliar territory. That he had been over this V mere seconds. No trepidation, nothing. This is the very reason DF did not choose to go down foolish routes of bringing in dog experts. It was completely unnecessary and unfounded.  He knew what was in those statements, from the off. Yes, he did ask about the dog and of what it had been doing, but is was at the V.  Remember here also, that initial look into the woodland at the 'Gino' break. No dog, no nothing. He introduced the woodland into the search. This woodland that he claimed never to have been in prior to that evening. And of course, we are talking around 10mins here. From the point of the search party meeting. Remarkable, isn't it. Impossible? - It was certainly proven to be.

and misleading...

Only one daughter lived with Sandra Lean in 2003 - I was not aware of this until recently
« Last Edit: April 27, 2021, 08:30:37 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #118 on: April 27, 2021, 08:32:14 PM »
This statement ‘Why would I, a mother of two girls around Jodi's age who lived right on the doorstep of this terrible murder, fight to free someone I thought for one minute could be guilty of it? is meaningless from my viewpoint - especially following Sandra’s comments on the exposure of Simon Hall’s guilt

As is this, ’To risk having someone who could have been capable of such brutality released into the community where my own daughters lived their lives?’

Maybe Sandra Lean was duped by the Mitchell’s protestations in 2003 - maybe she wasn’t

She most certainly made claim to me she had wasted 10 years of her life (following the exposure of Simon Halls guilt and subsequent confession) the suggestion being she’d been duped

Sandra Lean
‘As a clinical hypnotherapist, I know a bit about the power of suggestion. Confusion is a really powerful technique - while the conscious mind is trying to work out the confusing information, the ‘suggestion” is quietly being absorbed...’
« Last Edit: April 27, 2021, 08:37:37 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
  • Total likes: 796
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!
« Reply #119 on: April 27, 2021, 08:42:58 PM »
and misleading...

Only one daughter lived with Sandra Lean in 2003 - I was not aware of this until recently

How did you find out?

I was under the impression that her girls were around Jodi's age in 2003, and that they attended Newbattle High School.

So, where was the other daughter living?