UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧

Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Luke Mitchell and the murder of his teenage girfriend Jodi Jones on 30 June 2003. => Topic started by: TheArmchairDetective on June 26, 2019, 01:53:47 PM

Title: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: TheArmchairDetective on June 26, 2019, 01:53:47 PM
Who confessed to the murder?

After doing a bit of digging, I’ve come to the conclusion that I know for certain who the mystery person is that Corrine is referring to in her podcast with James English who confessed to the murder.

On page 111 of ‘Innocents Betrayed’, Sandra discusses a witness who, 10 weeks after the murder, was able to say for certain that ‘Stocky Man’ was a member of Jodi’s family.   

Remember Stocky Man? The person who was supposedly seen following closely behind Jodi on the evening she was murdered, who was around 5ft 7/5ft 10 with a grey hoodie and possibly a backpack?  Corrine, in her podcast, revealed that the confession was from this individual. 

Who is he then?

The identification by the witness 10 weeks after the murder where she pointed to a member of Jodi’s family was made from a group of strangers to her.

It is also the case that the family statements in this book appear to suggest that this family member didn’t leave the house that afternoon or evening.

However, after reading the book and looking over all the statements and times, and also accounting for the odd comment here and there by Corrine and Sandra in the podcasts relating to the Stocky Man sighting, there is someone who has been briefly mentioned but very much ignored.

“The person identified from a group of strangers by the witness was a member of Jodi’s family, yet they alleged they did not leave the house at all that afternoon or evening” (Innocents Betrayed, 2019, p.111).

There is only person who was A) a member of Jodi’s family, and B) who also alleged didn’t leave the house that afternoon.   When all of this information is coupled with this individual’s behaviour in the weeks before the murder, such as attacking and injuring people with knives, experiencing psychotic episodes and smoking large quantities of cannabis, it is evident that the person who was seen following Jodi and has confessed is indeed [Name removed].

Nobody has said for certain this is who it is, but the statements in the book and comments from Sandra and Corrine make it pretty easy to join the dots.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 26, 2019, 04:11:11 PM
Re the James English interview and alleged confession

she’s asked who she thinks carried out the murder and suggests it’s “the person who confessed and the person who was positively ID’d but she gives mixed messages because she also says that her and Sandra Lean think the motive for the murder was a punishment killing?

He’s had helpers 
“we think it’s been a punishment killing 
“he’s found out something that she’s done and he’s punished her for it


According to Corrine Mitchell the policeman who took the confession told Sandra Lean

It was also stated during the interview with JE words to the effect of;

they think the search party were out looking for someone else
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 26, 2019, 08:10:29 PM
Coolbreeze89 posts here https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=432507

Just thought I would add to this 11 years later - there has been new developments.Someone has confessed to the murder, and it was the same person who was seen following closely behind her before she disappeared onto Roan’s Dyke Path.The source of this can be found in a podcast on YouTube with James English involving Luke’s mother Corrine. I always knew he was innocent. There wasn’t even as much as a dog hair on her body from Mitchell. Someone has been roaming our streets for the best part of 16 years, whilst Luke has been banged up.I reckon she was followed by so-called confession man, intercepted by two others along the path who were also ‘in on it’, and either coaxed or coerced through the V-break in the wall. In my opinion, at least two or three, if not more, people were involved. I also don’t buy condom mans story either, therefore would also consider him as a key suspect. Nonetheless, the case has moved on a lot since its early days. The majority of the anomalies can actually be found in Dr Sandra Leans book Innocents Betrayed. A lot of people don’t buy her, but I do. Why would anyone spend the best part of 15 years investigating and analysing a case like this, to then pursue a PhD in criminology if she didn’t have any belief that he was innocent. A lot of people who knew Luke when he was in Polmont Young Offenders Institution said from the very beginning that he was innocent.

and here https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=5987206

”Short Summary

In the summer of 2003, 14-year-old Jodi Jones was found deceased behind a wall in Dalkeith, Edinburgh, by her boyfriend Luke Mitchell’s dog. The body was approximately 13m from a V-break opening in the wall where the stones had deteriorated. The discovery of the body by the dog was agreed at the time by everyone including Jodi’s family, until it came to trial when they changed their statements to incriminate Luke to suggest that he knew where the body was already. This ‘guilty knowledge’ was one of the prosecutions main pieces of “evidence” to convict, suggesting Luke knew it was here as he killed her.

From the discovery of the body, the only suspect who was ever officially investigated and charged with murder was her boyfriend Luke, despite numerous contradictory witness statements and no forensic evidence of him on Jodi, or visa versa. Over 15 years later, Luke is still incarcerated in HMP Shotts, Scotland. He is due to turn 31 this year and has created more memories in prison than he has outside.

Overall, the police investigation from the outset was flawed; other people were witnessed at the murder scene, such as John [Name removed] (Jodis cousin), Gordon [Name removed] (Jodis second cousin), a local cyclist passing named Leonard Kelly who heard strangling sounds from across the wall, Steven Kelly (Jodis sisters fiancé), and a mystery man following Jodi onto the path.

Additionally, numerous items of DNA were recovered from the body, none of which was EVER identified as being from Luke. A moped used by [Name removed] and [Name removed] was also discovered to have been seen leaning against the V-break in the wall at the estimated time of the murder, and they were unable to explain why they were there. They were let free without any further enquiry as Mitchell was already firmly in the frame, and had even lied to police as to when they were there.

The case, in my opinion, was ‘trial-by-media’ and absolutely stinks of a miscarriage of justice. Luke wasn’t there at all. The witness statements could not accurately account for him being there, whilst also accounting for him having time to come home, dispose of incriminating evidence, and go back out again. On the other hand, a mystery man was seen by a witness following closely behind Jodi as she entered one end of the path closest to her house.

Recently, a shocking revelation has since emerged about this man - he admitted it was him behind Jodi, and has confessed to the murder. A senior Police official took the confession from this person and has since informed both Luke Mitchell’s mother, Corrine, and Luke’s Power of Attorney, Dr Sandra Lean (criminologist). This person was witnessed at the time, but has only in the past few years admitted to the murder.

The theory I have is this: mystery man followed Jodi down the path as he knew that’s where she was going (indicating he knew her very well) and was subsequently intercepted by others, which occurred through a pre-planned arrangement. Jodi was then either manipulated to climb through the V-break in the wall, or she was forced through. She was then murdered by mystery man, whilst others acted as not only key witnesses, but accomplices.

Corrine and Sandra also hold the theory that the moped and other incriminating evidence was disposed of in a scrapyard following this. It wouldn’t have been difficult for others to get to the locus either, as most lived nearby.

Overall, Luke was nowhere near the scene at the time of the murder. We now have a solid confession, albeit over 15 years later. We have witness statements who heard strangling sounds from behind the wall. We have witness statements who seen the moped owned by either [Name removed] or [Name removed] learning against the wall, with no sign of anyone. We also, in addition to this, have DNA from multiple other males on the body - none of this was Luke’s.

Does anyone have any other theories?

Names mentioned above, revelations and details of this post can be found in Corrine Mitchell’s interview with James English on YouTube, and also in Sandra’s new book Innocents Betrayed.

Until mystery man confessed, I had my theory as to who followed her. Sperm was positively identified on the body too, which is absolutely bizarre to say the least given Jodi and her sister stayed in different homes. Nonetheless, I’ve replaced my initial suspect with mystery man now due to his confession.

Again to recap - mystery man follows Jodi, who is then intercepted by other locals. Jodi is murdered. Body is left to rot, while evidence is destroyed. Culprits cover their tracks. Luke is blamed for murder.

Jodi was basically ambushed by at least three assailants who were all known to her.

What do you think? Who is this mystery man who has confessed? Does anyone have any inside insight into this case?

Look forward to your input...

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Baz on June 27, 2019, 01:20:11 PM

Recently, a shocking revelation has since emerged about this man - he admitted it was him behind Jodi, and has confessed to the murder. A senior Police official took the confession from this person and has since informed both Luke Mitchell’s mother, Corrine, and Luke’s Power of Attorney, Dr Sandra Lean (criminologist). This person was witnessed at the time, but has only in the past few years admitted to the murder.


WHAT??? The confession was actually made to the police?

I wonder when this happened and if the person they are talking about is [Name removed] (as surmised by TheArmchairDetective)?

What do you make of this?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 27, 2019, 04:42:55 PM
WHAT??? The confession was actually made to the police?

I wonder when this happened and if the person they are talking about is [Name removed] (as surmised by TheArmchairDetective)?

What do you make of this?

According to coolbreeze89 ”a senior police official took the confession.”

No idea who the source is for this but I find the choice of words interesting; as though they believe the words they have used gives any alleged confession credence?!

Quote
WHAT??? The confession was actually made to the police?
Can’t help but think of people like Mark Williams Thomas and his involvement in the numerous false allegations etc (Have posted about this on other threads)

I also find it interesting how Sandra Lean is suggesting the following here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452099.html#msg452099

I was thinking about the claimed 20 pieces of solid evidence against Luke (that's been deleted now) - what's always interested me are the number of pieces of "evidence" that applied equally, and in some cases, moreso, to others than they did to Luke - so, drug use, connection with knives, "dark" interests, etc, etc. There are at least 5 others to whom all of these apply. Of those five, we can add serious mental health conditions (which didn't apply to Luke), previous attacks on women (which didn't apply to Luke), attacks with bladed intruments (which didn't apply to Luke), long histories of violence and/or involvement with the police (which didn't apply to Luke)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452099.html#msg452099

Dark interests” would suggest to me she has finally conceded Luke Mitchell’s interests in satanism aren’t/weren’t normal per se.

Having serious mental health conditions does not automatically suggest that person culpable of murder or indeed a danger to others.

I find the comment “previous attacks on women” misleading and requiring explanation of alleged attacks; on whom, what was done, how many times? etc. Where’s the proof or is she attempting to replicate the stories told about Luke Mitchell.

I am aware [Name removed] allegedly went to Sandra Leans house (several years ago) presumably because he was angry with her stance/campaigning etc. I think Billy Middleton was staying with her at the time of this event and IMO he was far more of a threat to her and her daughters than [Name removed] ever was.

I don’t condone the alleged event with [Name removed] btw but dangerous individuals with low empathy are often hidden in plain sight by a mask of normalcy.

Are you familiar with the Chris Watts case? Have a listen to his interviews.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=duu2NePfEo0

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=du8lVaCe7V0
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 27, 2019, 06:03:58 PM
Who confessed to the murder?

After doing a bit of digging, I’ve come to the conclusion that I know for certain who the mystery person is that Corrine is referring to in her podcast with James English who confessed to the murder.

On page 111 of ‘Innocents Betrayed’, Sandra discusses a witness who, 10 weeks after the murder, was able to say for certain that ‘Stocky Man’ was a member of Jodi’s family.   

Remember Stocky Man? The person who was supposedly seen following closely behind Jodi on the evening she was murdered, who was around 5ft 7/5ft 10 with a grey hoodie and possibly a backpack?  Corrine, in her podcast, revealed that the confession was from this individual. 

Who is he then?

The identification by the witness 10 weeks after the murder where she pointed to a member of Jodi’s family was made from a group of strangers to her.

It is also the case that the family statements in this book appear to suggest that this family member didn’t leave the house that afternoon or evening.

However, after reading the book and looking over all the statements and times, and also accounting for the odd comment here and there by Corrine and Sandra in the podcasts relating to the Stocky Man sighting, there is someone who has been briefly mentioned but very much ignored.

“The person identified from a group of strangers by the witness was a member of Jodi’s family, yet they alleged they did not leave the house at all that afternoon or evening” (Innocents Betrayed, 2019, p.111).

There is only person who was A) a member of Jodi’s family, and B) who also alleged didn’t leave the house that afternoon.   When all of this information is coupled with this individual’s behaviour in the weeks before the murder, such as attacking and injuring people with knives, experiencing psychotic episodes and smoking large quantities of cannabis, it is evident that the person who was seen following Jodi and has confessed is indeed [Name removed].

Nobody has said for certain this is who it is, but the statements in the book and comments from Sandra and Corrine make it pretty easy to join the dots.

9:48AM BST 16 Jul 2003
Detectives hunting the killer of Jodi Jones have received reports of the first possible sightings of the teenager on the night she died.
Jodi's body was discovered by a wooded path near her home on the outskirts of Dalkeith, Midlothian, 16 days ago. Two independent witnesses have now contacted police about seeing a girl who fits Jodi's description on Monday June 30.
They also told police they saw a man walking closely behind the girl along Easthouses Road towards the entrance to a path where Jodi's body was later found.

One witness told police they had seen the same person a week later on the night of a police reconstruction. Detectives are eager to trace the man, who they say could be a key witness in their investigation.
De Insp Tom Martin, one of the lead officers in the case, said: "This is a significant development for the inquiry team. We now have two independent witnesses who have given us good statements about seeing a young woman who is similar in description to Jodi.

Both witnesses saw the girl walking in Easthouses Road towards the entrance to the Roman Dyke pathway at around 5pm and both also noticed a man walking closely behind the girl.
"Interestingly, one of the witnesses believes he then saw the same man again on Monday July 7, one week later, the night of the police reconstruction. If this is the case, we need to trace this person as a matter of urgency as he may have seen something important on the night that Jodi died."

The man who police are keen to trace is white, stocky, 5ft 7in to 5ft 10in tall and appeared to be in his late teens or early 20s. He had short, tidy brown or ginger hair, perhaps curly or wavy on top.
The witnesses said he appeared to be in his late teens or early 20s and was wearing a dark-coloured sweatshirt top, with maybe a hood, and dark trousers, possibly jogging bottoms. He may also have been carrying a backpack on his shoulder.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/1436226/Witness-breakthrough-in-Jodi-murder-case.html
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 27, 2019, 06:27:49 PM
WHAT??? The confession was actually made to the police?

I wonder when this happened and if the person they are talking about is [Name removed] (as surmised by TheArmchairDetective)?

What do you make of this?

I’d be interested to learn if the alleged confession was made by one of the 5 individuals Sandra Lean refers to as having “serious mental health conditions?”

And if so - was their mental state assessed?

Did they know what they were saying, or why they were saying it?

Did the details of the alleged confession fit with the known facts of the case?

Was the alleged individual on drugs when they confessed, if so were any questions asked about how drugs might have impacted on their mental health?

Was their mental health properly assessed in the lead up to the confession?

Was their mental health assessed at the time of the confession itself?

All questions asked by Sandra Lean following Simon Halls confession.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 27, 2019, 07:12:21 PM
What do you make of this?

What do you make of it?


Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 27, 2019, 10:37:19 PM
Who confessed to the murder?

After doing a bit of digging, I’ve come to the conclusion that I know for certain who the mystery person is that Corrine is referring to in her podcast with James English who confessed to the murder.

On page 111 of ‘Innocents Betrayed’, Sandra discusses a witness who, 10 weeks after the murder, was able to say for certain that ‘Stocky Man’ was a member of Jodi’s family.   

Remember Stocky Man? The person who was supposedly seen following closely behind Jodi on the evening she was murdered, who was around 5ft 7/5ft 10 with a grey hoodie and possibly a backpack?  Corrine, in her podcast, revealed that the confession was from this individual. 

Who is he then?

The identification by the witness 10 weeks after the murder where she pointed to a member of Jodi’s family was made from a group of strangers to her.

It is also the case that the family statements in this book appear to suggest that this family member didn’t leave the house that afternoon or evening.

However, after reading the book and looking over all the statements and times, and also accounting for the odd comment here and there by Corrine and Sandra in the podcasts relating to the Stocky Man sighting, there is someone who has been briefly mentioned but very much ignored.

“The person identified from a group of strangers by the witness was a member of Jodi’s family, yet they alleged they did not leave the house at all that afternoon or evening” (Innocents Betrayed, 2019, p.111).

There is only person who was A) a member of Jodi’s family, and B) who also alleged didn’t leave the house that afternoon.   When all of this information is coupled with this individual’s behaviour in the weeks before the murder, such as attacking and injuring people with knives, experiencing psychotic episodes and smoking large quantities of cannabis, it is evident that the person who was seen following Jodi and has confessed is indeed [Name removed].

Nobody has said for certain this is who it is, but the statements in the book and comments from Sandra and Corrine make it pretty easy to join the dots.

Can you clarify something TAD?

Are you saying the person(s) who claim to have seen a member of [Name removed]’s family told Sandra Lean, 10 weeks after the murder, as opposed to the police? Or have I misunderstood what you’ve written?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: TheArmchairDetective on June 28, 2019, 12:22:18 AM
 Nicholas,

What appears to be the case is a suggestion in the book that this witness informed Police.  Sandra only managed to find out about this after gaining access to the case papers.   Again, it would appear that nothing was ever done about this identification, which according to Sandra is similar to the treatment of other potential witnesses.

The revealing part was when the witness described the person, who they claimed was Stocky Man, as being a member of Jodi’s family.  This family member supposedly never left the house that day, which when one looks at what Sandra has included in her book suggests this person is her brother [Name removed].   This person never had much in the form of an alibi, which off the top of my head was Jodi’s mother who said he very rarely left the house.   He always received transport, assuming due to his illness, and was supposedly at home on the day she was murdered.   

However, there was a period of time that went unaccounted for around five or six o’clock where this person may have been out the house.  Other statements appear to contradict the alibi of his mother. 

Corrine said the person following closely behind Jodi was Stocky Man.

She said this person also confessed.

Sandra never revealed the name, but said in a previous YouTube comment on one of the podcasts that the person who confessed was very well known to Jodi.

A witness said this person was a member of Jodi’s family.

When you join the dots and then look a little bit closer at this individual, their background, their character, their age, their mental status, their overall behaviour and the fact a sexual crime was not confirmed when her body was found, it is highly possible that this particular individual may well be the killer.

Thats if we are to believe that a confession has been made at all, and that we join the “Mitchell is Innocent” camp.

It’s not very difficult to come to this conclusion once you read the chapter on this person in her book.  It’s just a theory, but I suspect it is quite an accurate one.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 28, 2019, 12:05:38 PM
Nicholas,

What appears to be the case is a suggestion in the book that this witness informed Police.  Sandra only managed to find out about this after gaining access to the case papers.   Again, it would appear that nothing was ever done about this identification, which according to Sandra is similar to the treatment of other potential witnesses.

The revealing part was when the witness described the person, who they claimed was Stocky Man, as being a member of Jodi’s family.  This family member supposedly never left the house that day, which when one looks at what Sandra has included in her book suggests this person is her brother [Name removed].   This person never had much in the form of an alibi, which off the top of my head was Jodi’s mother who said he very rarely left the house.   He always received transport, assuming due to his illness, and was supposedly at home on the day she was murdered.   

However, there was a period of time that went unaccounted for around five or six o’clock where this person may have been out the house.  Other statements appear to contradict the alibi of his mother. 

Corrine said the person following closely behind Jodi was Stocky Man.

She said this person also confessed.

Sandra never revealed the name, but said in a previous YouTube comment on one of the podcasts that the person who confessed was very well known to Jodi.

A witness said this person was a member of Jodi’s family.


When you join the dots and then look a little bit closer at this individual, their background, their character, their age, their mental status, their overall behaviour and the fact a sexual crime was not confirmed when her body was found, it is highly possible that this particular individual may well be the killer.

Thats if we are to believe that a confession has been made at all, and that we join the “Mitchell is Innocent” camp.

It’s not very difficult to come to this conclusion once you read the chapter on this person in her book.  It’s just a theory, but I suspect it is quite an accurate one.

Yet here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452085.html#msg452085 gordo30 states:

Ok just the 20 on one person( I would t call them suspects)
1. Mental health problems treated by many different drugs exacerbated by the use of recreational drugs
2. Long time dealer of drugs.
3. Long history of violence
4. Use of knives
5. No alibi at at least 1 point that night
6. Never took part in the search for his sibling
7. Plans for that night we’re changed
8. Was seen following Jodi not long after she left the house.
9. Was one of the last people to see the victim alive
10. Would certainly know the area of the murder
11. Was never questioned by the police
12. Was there a danger to Jodi through his dealing with drugs?
13. Were told he never left the house for a long time although he had been out that weekend and was also that day
14. Missed appointment to see psychologist that day.
15. After the murder appeared withdrawn again possibly due to drugs
16. Threatening behaviour afterwards

Ok just the 16 points but many of these were applied circumstantially to Luke and quite a few of these points could be elaborated with more than one example. In all that I still could make up more to fit a circumstantial case. I don’t see the point as this looks like I’m claiming he committed  the murder and that would be wrong because I don’t believe he committed the murder
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 28, 2019, 12:43:00 PM
What appears to be the case is a suggestion in the book that this witness informed Police.  Sandra only managed to find out about this after gaining access to the case papers.   Again, it would appear that nothing was ever done about this identification, which according to Sandra is similar to the treatment of other potential witnesses.

It appeared that way in the Simon Hall case and with hindsight helped add to his false claims of innocence for so many years. In fact one of the men who I once wrongly believed was involved recently escaped from a secure facility https://www.essexlive.news/news/essex-news/violent-prisoner-who-absconded-jail-2028345

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 28, 2019, 01:09:12 PM
Yet here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452085.html#msg452085 gordo30 states:

Ok just the 20 on one person( I would t call them suspects)
1. Mental health problems treated by many different drugs exacerbated by the use of recreational drugs
2. Long time dealer of drugs.
3. Long history of violence
4. Use of knives
5. No alibi at at least 1 point that night
6. Never took part in the search for his sibling
7. Plans for that night we’re changed
8. Was seen following Jodi not long after she left the house.
9. Was one of the last people to see the victim alive
10. Would certainly know the area of the murder
11. Was never questioned by the police
12. Was there a danger to Jodi through his dealing with drugs?
13. Were told he never left the house for a long time although he had been out that weekend and was also that day
14. Missed appointment to see psychologist that day.
15. After the murder appeared withdrawn again possibly due to drugs
16. Threatening behaviour afterwards

Ok just the 16 points but many of these were applied circumstantially to Luke and quite a few of these points could be elaborated with more than one example. In all that I still could make up more to fit a circumstantial case. I don’t see the point as this looks like I’m claiming he committed  the murder and that would be wrong because I don’t believe he committed the murder


Was never questioned by the police” or was questioned by police but witness statement not disclosed to or asked for by defence? Or police conversations recorded in notebook?

“Missed appointment to see psychologist that day.” How is this known and who disclosed this to Luke Mitchell and his team? If in the case files, doesn’t that then suggest police had investigated him?

It wasn’t until 2013, before Simon Hall confessed, that it became apparent to me (following the zenith burglary omission) that JamieB’s police interview had never been disclosed to or requested by the defence. He had been arrested along with Hall (Same day and time; taken to a different police station) and subsequently became a prosecution witness - along with his mother.

It’s quite possible JamieB disclosed details to the police during his interviews, whilst under arrest - on or off record - that didn’t become relevant until the zenith burglary became known in November 2012.

My point is, I cannot see the powers that be calling for a review of Luke Mitchell’s case in order to help answer people like Sandra Leans questions.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Baz on June 28, 2019, 01:29:21 PM
What do you make of it?

It's hard to make anything of it when I don't really know any details. If it were really made to the police then I assume they investigated it and dismissed it as false, although given the terrible investigation... who knows!!

Was it made at the time or more recently, after Luke's conviction?

How do we even know someone did confess?

It always seemed to me that the truth about this would only come out if Luke finally admitted guilt or if someone else confessed, either to someone or to the police. So it's intriguing to hear there has been a confession but if it's not something recent then I presume it's not finally the answer I'd been hoping for.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 28, 2019, 01:37:09 PM
It's hard to make anything of it when I don't really know any details. If it were really made to the police then I assume they investigated it and dismissed it as false, although given the terrible investigation... who knows!!

An alleged confession is made to the police and Sandra Leans is told about it?

The first people to be informed of Simon Halls confession (outside of prison) were his victims family.


Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Baz on June 28, 2019, 01:42:30 PM
I’d be interested to learn if the alleged confession was made by one of the 5 individuals Sandra Lean refers to as having “serious mental health conditions?”

And if so - was their mental state assessed?

Did they know what they were saying, or why they were saying it?

Did the details of the alleged confession fit with the known facts of the case?

Was the alleged individual on drugs when they confessed, if so were any questions asked about how drugs might have impacted on their mental health?

Was their mental health properly assessed in the lead up to the confession?

Was their mental health assessed at the time of the confession itself?

All questions asked by Sandra Lean following Simon Halls confession.

I presume that is because the details of Simon's confession have never been made public (right?) and so it's hard for those involved who haven't seen the details to know the veracity of the confession.

I think it's fair enough to want to check these kind of details following a confession. People have been known to falsely confess, after all. I would want to be sure that the police have checked everything before believing believing a confession.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 28, 2019, 01:48:00 PM
An alleged confession is made to the police and Sandra Leans is told about it?

The first people to be informed of Simon Halls confession (outside of prison) were his victims family.

The police contacted me with a date of when news of the confession was to be published.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 28, 2019, 02:24:48 PM
I presume that is because the details of Simon's confession have never been made public (right?) and so it's hard for those involved who haven't seen the details to know the veracity of the confession.

I think it's fair enough to want to check these kind of details following a confession. People have been known to falsely confess, after all. I would want to be sure that the police have checked everything before believing believing a confession.

They were made public and it wasn’t a false confession. However, what motive would I have to make it up? It would have been the easy option to take the path of least resistance and remain in denial.

Furthermore I spoke with Sandra Lean around the time and gave her a lot of details re disclosures made by Simon Hall. Not only the disclosures he made leading up to and following the confession but also disclosures he’d made to me over the years, as well as the behaviours of his immediate family members over the years (some of which Sandra Lean had witnessed), that ,with hindsight, should have all been red flags.

The annoying thing is of course that trying to discuss the Luke Mitchell case inevitably seems to become a discussion about Sandra Lean which people then use as an excuse for airing their own personal grievances with her.   

It appears to me Sandra Lean is the spearhead of Luke Mitchell’s campaign. How many times has Luke Michell publicly expressed his personal opinions of the case against him, even though he’s had ample opportunity. This IMO is a red flag btw. Luke Mitchell could have written to numerous sources in order to have his say and for this information to be placed in the public domain. The fact he hasn’t I find highly suspicious.

What I find extremely interesting is that a criminologist like Sandra Lean wants a review of the Luke Mitchell case but never once suggested this following the Hall confession? Even though she’s featured the case in her first book “No Smoke - The shocking truth about British justice,”

”Criminology is the scientific study of the nature, extent, management, causes, control, consequences, and prevention of criminal behavior, both on individual and social levels.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Baz on June 28, 2019, 02:36:21 PM
They were made public and it wasn’t a false confession. However, what motive would I have to make it up? It would have been the easy option to take the path of least resistance and remain in denial.

It appears to me Sandra Lean is the spearhead of Luke Mitchell’s campaign. How many times has Luke Michell publicly expressed his personal opinions of the case against him, even though he’s had ample opportunity. This IMO is a red flag btw. Luke Mitchell could have written to numerous sources in order to have his say and for this information to be placed in the public domain. The fact he hasn’t I find highly suspicious.

What I find extremely interesting is that a criminologist like Sandra Lean wants a review of the Luke Mitchell case but never once suggested this following the Hall confession? Even though she’s featured the case in her first book “No Smoke - The shocking truth about British justice,”

”Criminology is the scientific study of the nature, extent, management, causes, control, consequences, and prevention of criminal behavior, both on individual and social levels.

I wasn't claiming it was a false confession, only that such things happen. I've never seen the details of Simon's confession published anywhere but then I haven't really searched for them so it's no surprise they may have passed me by.

Quote
The annoying thing is of course that trying to discuss the Luke Mitchell case inevitably seems to become a discussion about Sandra Lean which people then use as an excuse for airing their own personal grievances with her.

I think I'll just stand by this quote rather than getting into yet ANOTHER discussion about someone who I don't know and who is not here to defend herself.   
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 28, 2019, 02:42:34 PM
I wasn't claiming it was a false confession, only that such things happen. I've never seen the details of Simon's confession published anywhere but then I haven't really searched for them so it's no surprise they may have passed me by.
Quote
The annoying thing is of course that trying to discuss the Luke Mitchell case inevitably seems to become a discussion about Sandra Lean which people then use as an excuse for airing their own personal grievances with her.

I think I'll just stand by this quote rather than getting into yet ANOTHER discussion about someone who I don't know and who is not here to defend herself.

Sandra Lean has made no secret she reads this forum and I’ve made no secret I read the JB forum. Therefore it’s her choice if she makes comment or not.

She’s Luke Mitchell’s spokesperson. She’s written a book about the case. I think it would be foolish of anyone to accept her word on face value. Not because I was once acquainted with her but because of cases like Simon Halls and of the lessons learned following his confession and how he was able to con so many - including Sandra Lean!

Again, ”criminology is the study of the nature, extent, management, causes, control, consequences, and prevention of criminal behavior, both on individual and social levels.

Many of the anomalies in the Luke Mitchell case featured in the Simon Hall case. In fact if you were to refer to Sandra Lean’s first book “No Smoke” I think she referred to an imaginary 12 point system; the Mitchell case had all 12, the Hall case 10. Someone please correct me if I’m wrong.

And for example, in the Simon Hall case Sandra Lean states in her book the prosecution relied on innuendo and conjecture. In actual fact the prosecution chose to pursue a motive of a burglary gone wrong, as opposed to having been sexually motivated, as it turned out to be. What this meant is Simon Hall was only sentenced to a life tariff of 13 years as opposed to 20 plus and a criminologist would surely recognise for example the impact and consequences this would have on not only a convicted prisoner, who’s sexual deviancy and dangerousness had not been recognised, established or addressed but indeed the consequences on society and all those who came into contact with him thereafter.

The risk factors in these cases are often omitted or minimised.

IF a confession has been made in this case and there are no doubts whatsoever to its validity, I’d be interested to learn what safeguards the police and indeed the Luke Mitchell campaign have taken since learning of the alleged details - presuming they have?

Saying someone has confessed is one thing, being 100% certain and doing everything in ones power to show this to be a fact is another.

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 28, 2019, 03:56:44 PM
If it can be showed Luke Mitchell is factually innocent and the person who allegedly confessed murdered [Name removed] and is at large and a danger to others, and those people claiming so have the courage of their convictions, IMO they would have no fear of the consequences and name them.

Claims of not doing so because of said individual not getting a fair trial seem hypocritical, do they not?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: TheArmchairDetective on June 29, 2019, 03:22:32 AM
It's hard to make anything of it when I don't really know any details. If it were really made to the police then I assume they investigated it and dismissed it as false, although given the terrible investigation... who knows!!

Was it made at the time or more recently, after Luke's conviction?

How do we even know someone did confess?

It always seemed to me that the truth about this would only come out if Luke finally admitted guilt or if someone else confessed, either to someone or to the police. So it's intriguing to hear there has been a confession but if it's not something recent then I presume it's not finally the answer I'd been hoping for.

As far as I know, the “confession” was recent.  In fact, according to Sandra herself, the confession has only come to light in the past few years.  I assume she means from around 2015 onwards, perhaps?

If the confession is indeed from Jodi’s brother of whom was clearly heavily shielded during the investigation, as hardly a word of him was ever mentioned in the press, then it’s going to be particularly difficult, if not impossible, to make it admissible in court.  The guy suffered from a psychotic mental illness and was reportedly attending psychiatry appointments.  This individual was supposedly heavily medicated for symptoms of schizophrenia, which were obviously exacerbated by his habitual misuse of cannabis.

I can’t say for certain that this is the individual who confessed, of course, but it isn’t really that difficult to see that he should have been a key suspect.  His violent and spontaneous aggression towards others where knives and “bladed instruments” were used have been documented by Sandra.  The fact that a witness also claimed ‘Stocky Man’ to be a member of Jodi’s family also rules out some other possible suspects, such as your Mark Kanes, Robert Greens and Steven Kelly’s.   Jodi’s brother was substantially older than Jodi at the time of the murder.  I think he was around 20 when she was killed.  This would also support the statistics on murders being more likely committed by adults. 

How do we know if someone confessed?

The short answer is - we don’t.  Someone in prison many years ago confessed to this crime and nothing was ever followed up.  People can confess to anything.  It’s highly likely given the nature of Sandra’s approach to all of this; that being pointing blame at anyone other than Mitchell, that it is actually made up.  The book she has written “Innocents Betrayed” is very much tilted towards Mitchell being innocent, but is actually more about exposing the Scottish Criminal Justice System as being a circus.   Dr Lean is clearly very friendly with Mitchell’s mother, therefore it is impossible to remove the natural bias involved in convicting anyone else other than this woman’s son.

If we take what the book is saying to be true, which I am skeptical as there are many wild claims throughout it which are not supported by evidence, then a confession may indeed exist.   However, Dr Lean can’t even provide proof that Mitchell used the Speaking Clock service on a regular basis.  She continuously claims he phoned this multiple times before the murder, in an attempt to say that the time he phoned it on June 30th 2003 at 16:54 was simply an innocent coincidence.

Bollocks.

She has ultimately failed to produce EVIDENCE of this.  She claims this was the case, but has failed to show any proof, such as phone records.  Surely given the amount of detail already released in her book that such a task would be a formality?  There are far more incriminating statements, opinions and facts in the book than this.  Not only that, Donald Findlay at the appeal court never mentioned Mitchell’s frequent use of this service.  Surely this would have been a massive selling point at an appeal hearing to convince the judges of his innocence?

He never used this as evidence because there wasn’t any.

Take what you want from it all.  Dr Lean has hinted that anyone other than Mitchell could essentially be responsible for Jodi’s death.  In her eyes, it’s never going to be him.  When Corrine Mitchell allowed her underage son to get a tattoo of a skull with flames coming from it, she said “That’s really him”.  That’s him what? A representation of evil? 

Mothers and fathers know their sons and daughters better than anyone.

Neither the mothers behaviour or the codswallop from Dr Sandra Lean can be trusted.   Her personal hunch with the Criminal Justice System is also overwhelming in the book, and her previous track record with Adrian Prout and Simon Hall do not make a very convincing read.   Maybe she will hit it this time.

Third time lucky?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 29, 2019, 10:07:07 AM
As far as I know, the “confession” was recent.  In fact, according to Sandra herself, the confession has only come to light in the past few years.  I assume she means from around 2015 onwards, perhaps?

If the confession is indeed from Jodi’s brother

Confessed then married? Unlikely.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: TheArmchairDetective on June 29, 2019, 02:45:31 PM
What do we have on the brother just now? Where is he? What is he doing with his life? Married you say? Where did you find that out?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 29, 2019, 03:07:05 PM
What do we have on the brother just now? Where is he? What is he doing with his life? Married you say? Where did you find that out?

Married Sept 2015
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 29, 2019, 03:09:35 PM
His violent and spontaneous aggression towards others where knives and “bladed instruments” were used have been documented by Sandra.   

Documented where exactly? What has been documented?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 29, 2019, 03:12:07 PM
The guy suffered from a psychotic mental illness and was reportedly attending psychiatry appointments. 

Where has this come from?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 29, 2019, 04:27:55 PM
Nicholas,

What appears to be the case is a suggestion in the book that this witness informed Police.  Sandra only managed to find out about this after gaining access to the case papers.  Do you mean the SCCRC’s statement of reasons? Or are you referring to case papers? Again, it would appear that nothing was ever done about this identification, which according to Sandra is similar to the treatment of other potential witnesses. Nothing was ever done or all material relating to this wasn’t disclosed?

The revealing part was when the witness described the person, who they claimed was Stocky Man, as being a member of Jodi’s family. Who? What witness? Were they credible? This family member supposedly never left the house that day, which when one looks at what Sandra has included in her book suggests this person is her brother [Name removed].   This person never had much in the form of an alibi, which off the top of my head was Jodi’s mother who said he very rarely left the house.   He always received transport, assuming due to his illness, and was supposedly at home on the day she was murdered.   

However, there was a period of time that went unaccounted for around five or six o’clock where this person may have been out the house.  Other statements appear to contradict the alibi of his mother. 

Corrine said the person following closely behind Jodi was Stocky Man.

She said this person also confessed.

Sandra never revealed the name, but said in a previous YouTube comment on one of the podcasts that the person who confessed was very well known to Jodi.

A witness said this person was a member of Jodi’s family. They could have been mistaken but of course helps Sandra Lean to tell her version of a story.

When you join the dots and then look a little bit closer at this individual, their background, their character, their age, their mental status, their overall behaviour and the fact a sexual crime was not confirmed when her body was found, it is highly possible that this particular individual may well be the killer. I disagree! They may well have been presented to have you think they look like the killer but you are only getting a version of events told by Sandra Lean.

Thats if we are to believe that a confession has been made at all, and that we join the “Mitchell is Innocent” camp.

It’s not very difficult to come to this conclusion once you read the chapter on this person in her book.  It’s just a theory, but I suspect it is quite an accurate one. Theory not fact

I would be mindful that Sandra Lean is crafty.

She says here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fqQ7lnucUMI @ approx 39.12 (and listen to the inflection in her voice)

For what we’ve been allowed access to I would say there’s no doubt that Luke did not do this

But there’s always gonna be, at the back of your mind, what if they got this.. They would have used it - clearly...


She may sound convincing to some people but most certainly not to me.

And watch her face when she says, “they would have used it - clearly.

Would they? Do you think she’s being deceptive?

I’d have another listen to what Sandra Lean says about “stocky man” if I were you.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: TheArmchairDetective on June 29, 2019, 08:56:04 PM
All of the details regarding [Name removed] are contained within Sandra’s new book Innocents Betrayed, which includes a paragraph or two on his mental health appointments, or the re-scheduling of, should I say, and also that of his propensity to having violent outbursts.  Jodi actually told Luke that her brother had frequent violent outbursts, and his mother Judy also said that her sons behaviour was unpredictable. 
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 29, 2019, 09:04:17 PM
All of the details regarding [Name removed] are contained within Sandra’s new book Innocents Betrayed, which includes a paragraph or two on his mental health appointments, or the re-scheduling of, should I say, and also that of his propensity to having violent outbursts.  Jodi actually told Luke that her brother had frequent violent outbursts, and his mother Judy also said that her sons behaviour was unpredictable.

Does she say specifically where the details have come from in order to go into her book? Eg, case papers (witness statements) Luke Mitchell etc?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 29, 2019, 10:13:17 PM
All of the details regarding [Name removed] are contained within Sandra’s new book Innocents Betrayed, which includes a paragraph or two on his mental health appointments, or the re-scheduling of, should I say, and also that of his propensity to having violent outbursts.  Jodi actually told Luke that her brother had frequent violent outbursts, and his mother Judy also said that her sons behaviour was unpredictable.

I really wouldn’t fall for Sandra Lean’s version of a story if I were you.

She’s renowned for her antagonising and quite clearly gets a kick out of it.

Sandra Lean
@SandraLean5
You know you're rattling cages when people resort to personal attacks and lies. Gives me a warm glow!!!!
8:06 PM · Jun 3, 2019 · Twitter Web Client
https://mobile.twitter.com/SandraLean5/status/1135623855916158977

She no doubt hopes she’ll get a rise out of people like [Name removed]’s brother so that she can use it against him at some point.

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 29, 2019, 10:52:09 PM
Dr Lean has hinted that anyone other than Mitchell could essentially be responsible for Jodi’s death.  In her eyes, it’s never going to be him.  When Corrine Mitchell allowed her underage son to get a tattoo of a skull with flames coming from it, she said “That’s really him”.  That’s him what? A representation of evil? 

Mothers and fathers know their sons and daughters better than anyone.

Neither the mothers behaviour or the codswallop from Dr Sandra Lean can be trusted.   Her personal hunch with the Criminal Justice System is also overwhelming in the book, and her previous track record with Adrian Prout and Simon Hall do not make a very convincing read.   

I concur.

Corrine Mitchell refers to her son as normal but so did Cindy Watts about her son https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YHMFQzyAAu8

Sandra Lean sat back and watched as Simon Hall's guilt was being exposed across the forums end of 2012/early 2013. (This one and the JB forum)

In Feb 2013 she stated to me:
"I refer to your recent communications with me, your posts on the Bamber forum, and our previous exchanges.
While I appreciate that fighting a MOJ is an uphill struggle, and a steep learning curve, there are some "mistakes" which cannot be explained as ignorance, enthusiastic but misguided belief, or any of the other well trodden routes most people take on their journey towards justice.
I personally believe that your recent online behaviour, the way you handled Simon's confession to the other burglary, and the consequent attacks of Shaun and Stephanie Bon have all been detrimental to public support for Simon. The letter, supposedly from Simon, was a disgraceful slap in the face to many, many people who have tried to help Simon over the years


She chose to support the 3 people who all withheld vital facts from a murder investigation. It should also be noted she was fully aware of the hate campaign against me which involved 2 of them.

From November 2010:
"My motivation has been called into question, my honesty and integrity trashed, all because I chose to devote seven years of my life trying to help people. Yes, I know you were at the centre of a hate campaign, but that wasn't my doing and I played no part in it whatsoever - nobody could ever have used a single word I had said about you, because there was nothing to use.
" what hurts is that you could not step back, knowing me as I thought you did, and ask yourself, is there perhaps another explanation for this. Nope, instant public condemnation, in the belief that you were being attacked, when, in fact, I was trying to defend you.
That your words are being used to paint me as dishonest and unreliable, and that in turn is being used to undermine Luke's case, is probably one of the worst experiences in all of this. I thought you were my friend.
There was absolutely no intention to 'scapegoat' you for anything
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg384700.html#msg384700


And to date Sandra Lean has still yet to publicly accept the fact she was conned by Simon Hall.

Let’s not forget - “Criminology is the study of crime, order and criminal justice. It considers a broad range of topics related to offending and victimisation, including their causes, social impact and prevention.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: TheArmchairDetective on June 30, 2019, 02:01:59 AM
Speaking of the Bamber forum, I’ve tried to join this but nobody seems to be willing to accept my request.

Do you know why this would be?

I am aware Sandra is on the Bamber one and not this, so was hoping to speak to her a little bit...
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 30, 2019, 12:11:58 PM
Speaking of the Bamber forum, I’ve tried to join this but nobody seems to be willing to accept my request.

Do you know why this would be?

I am aware Sandra is on the Bamber one and not this, so was hoping to speak to her a little bit...

You could always pose questions to her here https://invidiou.sh/watch?v=fqQ7lnucUMI where she appears to reply.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: TheArmchairDetective on June 30, 2019, 02:15:04 PM
Why would the Jeremy Bamber forum not approve me as a member do you know?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 30, 2019, 03:10:32 PM
Why would the Jeremy Bamber forum not approve me as a member do you know?

No idea. Could only speculate.

Lithium and his posts were recently removed from the Luke Mitchell thread. I don’t know if Lithium removed his posts and then himself or whether it was done by a moderator?

Gordo30 stated the following:
Lithium has left the building and this thread has become unintelligible. There are better times ahead with a lot of effort and a big push to prove this case a MOJ and the support will be with Luke as it has the past 16 years.
I don’t want to try and understand motives for the deletion of much of what has been discussed here as private reasons are enough.
I’m sry though as we had new posters contribute even although they failed to follow up on what they contributed to but again as with a case like this it’s hard to even know where to start let alone know anything about the case in general.
looking forward always
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452098.html#msg452098
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 30, 2019, 04:36:44 PM
Re the Bamber forum - The cracks are well and truly showing between Sandra, Nugnug and Gordo

In response to Sandra here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452103.html#msg452103

 Gordo30 posted:
“It doesn’t look out of place though, Jodi might have wanted a different form of relationship with her sister, friends and closeness to the point where she wanted to be more like her. She may have looked up to her sister and didn’t want to let her sister know there were problems

Nugnug posted the following at 1.44pm and edited it at 1.50pm
Re: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003
« Reply #4473 on: Today at 01:44 PM »
“what does not add p to me is she had been self harming rom the age of 8 and her mum seems to have only found out about it recently.

im men of somone in the same house as you was cuting themselves even if they did try and hide wouldent you notice at some time.
« Last Edit: Today at 01:50 PM by nugnug »

The above post have since been deleted but not for another couple of hours or so

Sandra replies:
I've never heard that she was claimed to have been self-harming from the age of 8 - that would have been round about the age she was when her dad died. I know she struggled for her first two years at high school - I always assumed the self-harm began in that period.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452139.html#msg452139

Nugnug then tries to squirm out of what he’s written by deceptively posting the following:
oh soory missread the link i will delete that post.

i wonder hy he was reading her dairy was it just nosey or did he want to know somthing i doubt if she would of left it lying around so he must of looked for it.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452140.html#msg452140

Here’s the links he’s referring to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4195169.stm

How could he possibly have misread anything about an 8 year old [Name removed]?


And note how he attempts to discredit on the Anniversary of [Name removed]’s murder  *&^^&
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Myster on June 30, 2019, 05:17:53 PM
Are they Aberdeen Angus or Friesians that have been lost?   *%87
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Myster on June 30, 2019, 05:20:01 PM
No-one should pay much attention to a gormless grown adult who pretends to spell like eight-year old.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 30, 2019, 09:45:24 PM
I really wouldn’t fall for Sandra Lean’s version of a story if I were you.

She stated here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg384908.html#msg384908

”Stephanie said
Quote
Around the same time you appeared to accept the confession was genuine and had been made voluntarily and went on to state:

"Simon had a huge amount of support from a very large number of people. Perhaps you would consider that those people, at the very least, deserve an explanation

Context, of course, is everything! Since various parts of my email have been quoted in various contexts, here, for the avoidance of doubt, is the quoted email in its entirety - posters can make up their own minds what I "appeared to accept":

18th August 2013

Dear Stephanie,
 
I did not email you on behalf of anyone but myself. I did so to let you and Simon know that many people did not believe the "confession" as reported was genuine, or had been truly voluntarily made. There is no ego in this for me, and certainly no personal agenda, other than being able to help if and where I can.
 
I'm sorry this is the standpoint you are taking, and sorrier still that you have chosen to respond in the manner you have. As a matter of courtesty, I mentioned the decision about No Smoke, as six other families are immediately affected by the reports of Simon's confession, and it may be in their interests to simply withdraw the book from circulation altogether.
 
If, as you appear to be implying, Simon's confession is both genuine and voluntary, then I thank you for the clarification. You appear to have forgotten that I was highlighting Simon's case, along with many others for several years before WAP came into existence.
 
You were not averse to accepting the many, many hours of advice, assistance and support you had from me, personally, for a very long time. I sincerely hope you do not begrudge others the same - it is not the case that, because Simon has confessed, the others must, as a result, be guilty.

Simon had a huge amount of support from a very large number of people. Perhaps you would consider that those people, at the very least, deserve an explanation?
 
Sandra

The reason I mentioned Stephanie apparently "implying" that Simon was, in fact, guilty, is that she did not say so in her return email preferring, instead, to assert her beliefs about the guilt of others - that is the "standpoint" to which I refer in the email.

As I said, others on this forum are free to make of this whatever they choose


On 8th Aug 2013 Sandra sent the following

Dear Stephanie,

I heard, at around 2pm this afternoon, the news that Simon had "confessed his
guilt."

I don't want to say too much by email, but I wanted you to know that I am thinking
of you both this evening, and everything I have said in the past regarding Simon's
case still stands. Many of the others I have spoken with today feel the same way.

I have a new mobile number ********, and a new landline number from tomorrow
*******. I have no idea if this message will reach you. I hope it does.

Sandra



My reply on the 18th Aug 2013 was:

You know, I know and many many others know Billy Middleton's stories do not add up and that he is clearly guilty of causing that fire.

I do not forget the conversations we had on this subject!

Your ego's and personal agendas are clear for all to see and have been for a very long time.

WAP was only set up in order for Billy Middleton to appease his guilt. The truth always outs in the end!
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 30, 2019, 10:13:56 PM
The reason I mentioned Stephanie apparently "implying" that Simon was, in fact, guilty, is that she did not say so in her return email preferring, instead, to assert her beliefs about the guilt of others - that is the "standpoint" to which I refer in the email.

I asserted my belief about the guilt of Billy Middleton NOT others. One person, singular NOT plural!

On 11th August 2013 Billy Middleton chose to publish a blog about Simon Halls confession, these are excerpts of said blog:

"Which is more probable, that after Simon’s last appeal was rejected, knowing that it was the best chance he was ever going to have, which was followed my months and months of psychological abuse and mind games by the person who drove every last one of the thousands of supporters he had away with vile and malicious on and offline feuds such that he finally couldn’t take any more, he cracked, or that Roy Lambert was right all along despite all of the evidence to the contrary and everyone else was wrong?"

I personally lost respect for Simon some time ago but I didn’t lose the compassion and humanity I would need to before I could ignore the above, the facts of the past don’t get erased by the words of the present.

Simon might well have been progressing better than others through the prison system in that respect despite maintaining innocence, and it very much looked like he was about to join the exceptionally rare few who were released on or close to minimum tariff despite it, but there is little doubt in my mind that someone sending the parole board an abusive letter over a dispute where he could be reintegrated into society upon release shortly before his confession will have done that progress absolutely no good whatsoever.

People supporting someone incarcerated for something they believe they haven’t done need to look at how Simon was supported and learn from the mistakes, whether his confession is true or not, because while it’s easy to blame him in isolation for the harm done, if it’s a false confession your loved ones never ever ever need put in the position he was in to end up with and you can’t do that looking only at the 10 letter word confession and his other perceived option may well have been suicide if he really just couldn’t take it anymore. You need to look at the evidence and all that went on before it and see how wrong it was."


Sandra Lean was still affiliated with WAP and it wasn’t until July 2014 that it was made known - “she would not be involved with the website and forum set up to promote Mitchell’s cause as “I no longer have power of attorney”

Then on 16th July 2014
“A CRIMINOLOGIST who spearheaded efforts to overturn Luke Mitchell’s conviction for the murder of his girlfriend Jodi Jones has withdrawn from the campaign to free him.
Dr Sandra Lean, who highlighted his case in her book No Smoke! The Shocking Truth About British Justice, led the battle against Mitchell’s life sentence alongside his mother, Corinne.
Dr Lean would not comment on any factors behind her departure, adding the “reasons would remain private as a matter of respect”.
Mrs Mitchell confirmed Dr Lean had left, but did not want to comment further.
Dr Lean added she would not be involved with the website and forum set up to promote Mitchell’s cause as “I no longer have power of attorney”.
https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/criminologist-withdraws-from-fight-to-free-luke-mitchell-1-3478153
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on June 30, 2019, 10:50:36 PM
Your ego's and personal agendas are clear for all to see and have been for a very long time.

WAP was only set up in order for Billy Middleton to appease his guilt. The truth always outs in the end!


Given the circumstances, and with hindsight, I was far too passive in my response.

My stance regarding Billy Middleton changed as I started to come out of the FOG (fear, obligation, guilt)

Off topic but I believe some of these facts are relevant to the thread and could be helpful to those people who aren’t aware of how Sandra Lean can manipulate alleged facts to suit her agenda at any given time and present them to others in order to mislead.

it is not the case that, because Simon has confessed, the others must, as a result, be guilty.

The above are Sandra Leans words not mine but she attempted to present them like I’d said them - Which is highly deceptive btw.


If, as you appear to be implying, Simon's confession is both genuine and voluntary, then I thank you for the clarification. You appear to have forgotten that I was highlighting Simon's case, along with many others for several years before WAP came into existence.
 
You were not averse to accepting the many, many hours of advice, assistance and support you had from me, personally, for a very long time. I sincerely hope you do not begrudge others the same - it is not the case that, because Simon has confessed, the others must, as a result, be guilty.

Simon had a huge amount of support from a very large number of people. Perhaps you would consider that those people, at the very least, deserve an explanation?



Sandra Lean appeared to have forgotten that her book had been published well before I’d even heard of her. NONE of its content came from me therefore perhaps an explanation to those people deserved to come from her.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on July 01, 2019, 10:39:51 AM
What I find extremely interesting is that a criminologist like Sandra Lean wants a review of the Luke Mitchell case but never once suggested this following the Hall confession? Even though she’s featured the case in her first book “No Smoke - The shocking truth about British justice,”

”Criminology is the scientific study of the nature, extent, management, causes, control, consequences, and prevention of criminal behavior, both on individual and social levels.

Again for clarity, I’d never heard of Sandra Lean until after her book “No Smoke” was published.

If you listen to Sandra Lean’s interviews with James English and compare and contrast it to Corrine Mitchell’s you may recognise the two women are not singing from the same hymn sheet.

Sandra Lean wants a review of the Luke Mitchell’s case (She refers to Hillsborough to make this point). She talks about having doubts “every single day.” Doubts she could be wrong.

It appears to me Corrine Mitchell hasn’t picked up on this?

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on July 01, 2019, 11:05:14 AM
And to date Sandra Lean has still yet to publicly accept the fact she was conned by Simon Hall.

Let’s not forget - “Criminology is the study of crime, order and criminal justice. It considers a broad range of topics related to offending and victimisation, including their causes, social impact and prevention.

Following Simon Halls confession a Steve Sinclair made a comment at the bottom of Professor Julie Price’s Justice Gap article - “A time to take stock” which has recently been removed from the WWW after my communication with Jon Robbins.

On 24th Feb 2014 Steve Sinclair stated:
Now that Simon Hall has apparently taken his own life it is perhaps pertinent to view his “confession” in this new light. I am sure that some will say that his suicide is a certain sign of his anguish over his guilt. I say that, on the contrary, his death may have been through pure despair.
That despair most likely stemmed from the failure of his final appeal.Where was he to go from there? No more new evidence to rely on…the end of the road.
His confession was more than likely sparked by the inevitable realisation that those who are deemed IDOM are unlikely to ever be considered for parole. I don’t need to spell out the treatment IDOM prisoners face compared to those who realise their guilty status and play the game to prepare them for release.
I am not concerned by the kerfuffle over his so called confession. The bald facts of the case are that the conviction of Simon Hall was a miscarriage of justice. There was and still isn’t any evidence on which he should have been convicted.


Not sure if this is the same Steve Sinclair http://www.free-david-ferguson.org.uk/index.php ?

However, the fact Sandra Lean has yet to publicly admit to having been conned by Simon Hall, and indeed by those people she spoke with in order to put together the chapter in her book “No Smoke” should be a red flag for people like Corrine Mitchell and Steve Sinclair.

“I am not concerned by the kerfuffle over his so called confession?” The “kerfuffle” is exactly what people like Steve Sinclair should have been concerned with.

The bald facts of the case are that the conviction of Simon Hall was a miscarriage of justice.” What “bald facts” does he refer to, a version of the “bald facts” presented by Sandra Lean in her book “No Smoke?”

Dear Stephanie,

I heard, at around 2pm this afternoon, the news that Simon had "confessed his
guilt."

I don't want to say too much by email, but I wanted you to know that I am thinking
of you both this evening, and everything I have said in the past regarding Simon's
case still stands.
Many of the others I have spoken with today feel the same way.


I have a new mobile number ********, and a new landline number from tomorrow
*******. I have no idea if this message will reach you. I hope it does.

Sandra


Given Sandra Leans judgement and indeed behaviour following Simon Halls confession I would advise everyone to err on the side of caution regarding any alleged confession in the Luke Mitchell case. Plus it’s more than likely imo Corrine Mitchell will only hear what she wants to hear.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on July 01, 2019, 01:55:03 PM
Sandra Lean was still affiliated with WAP and it wasn’t until July 2014 that it was made known - “she would not be involved with the website and forum set up to promote Mitchell’s cause as “I no longer have power of attorney”

I don’t believe the reason Sandra Lean “would not be involved with the website and forum” because as is stated, “I no longer have power of attorney,” and I’ve wondered if it had anything to do with her and Billy Middleton?

Did she finally recognise in him what many of us had recognised long before?

Or was it a combination of the above and other factors?

Having serious mental health conditions does not automatically suggest that person culpable of murder or indeed a danger to others.

I find the comment “previous attacks on women” misleading and requiring explanation of alleged attacks; on whom, what was done, how many times? etc. Where’s the proof or is she attempting to replicate the stories told about Luke Mitchell.

I am aware [Name removed] allegedly went to Sandra Leans house (several years ago) presumably because he was angry with her stance/campaigning etc. I think Billy Middleton was staying with her at the time of this event and IMO he was far more of a threat to her and her daughters than [Name removed] ever was.

I don’t condone the alleged event with [Name removed] btw but dangerous individuals with low empathy are often hidden in plain sight by a mask of normalcy.

What “previous attacks on women?” Is she referring to herself and herself only and has embellished this to make it sound like more than one? Like she did with my email reply to her here http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10836.msg540924#msg540924

The following was written by Sandra Lean after I had told John Lamberton about the phonecall I received from her on a Sunday telling me she’d had to drive Billy Middleton to the airport after an incident between her and him (Middleton) at her home, some of which was witnessed by her daughter. Which ended with Billy Middleton leaving and her and her youngest daughter subsequently finding him covered in blood somewhere on the streets of Edinburgh.

From November 2010:
"My motivation has been called into question, my honesty and integrity trashed, all because I chose to devote seven years of my life trying to help people. Yes, I know you were at the centre of a hate campaign, but that wasn't my doing and I played no part in it whatsoever - nobody could ever have used a single word I had said about you, because there was nothing to use.
" what hurts is that you could not step back, knowing me as I thought you did, and ask yourself, is there perhaps another explanation for this. Nope, instant public condemnation, in the belief that you were being attacked, when, in fact, I was trying to defend you.
That your words are being used to paint me as dishonest and unreliable, and that in turn is being used to undermine Luke's case, is probably one of the worst experiences in all of this. I thought you were my friend.
There was absolutely no intention to 'scapegoat' you for anything
My post was an attempt to take the wind out of his sails by saying, Yes, Stephanie did talk to John, but not in the sinister/negative way he is trying to portray it. What John has done is take an innocent mistake by Stephanie and turn it into a weapon for him to use against others
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg384700.html#msg384700
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg384647.html#msg384647

With hindsight, the incident to which I refer is relevant to Luke Mitchell’s case, as Sandra Lean obviously recognised around the time this all happened. As did John Lamberton.

After said incident Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton became business partners?

How and why did Sandra Lean fail to recognise this as abuse? Or did she recognise it was abuse and went into partenership with him anyway? Did he con her to go into partnership with him?

This is relevant for so many reasons.

In her interview with James English she refers to her daughters being around about the same age as [Name removed] etc etc and why would she be doing what she’s doing etc etc she refers to her daughters safety etc

Yet the Billy Middleton incident (The same Billy Middleton who received a verdict of not proven of causing the death of his baby daughter) didn’t deter her? When she described the incident she said there was “a cigarette paper” between us. Her youngest daughter was a witness and had to step in to intervene.

There was another incident of him leaving burning cigarette ends in the ashtray, whilst they were all in the house.

Doesn’t this suggest double standards? Lack of insight? Poor judgement?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Bullseye on July 01, 2019, 02:41:42 PM
Why would the Jeremy Bamber forum not approve me as a member do you know?

I signed upto both this site and the bamber site around the same time, I’m sure I received an email to confirm my account here was set up and active but I received nothing for the bamber site, I tried logging in with the ID and password I’d used and it let me in ok.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on July 01, 2019, 03:44:04 PM
Re the Bamber forum - The cracks are well and truly showing between Sandra, Nugnug and Gordo

In response to Sandra here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452103.html#msg452103

 Gordo30 posted:
“It doesn’t look out of place though, Jodi might have wanted a different form of relationship with her sister, friends and closeness to the point where she wanted to be more like her. She may have looked up to her sister and didn’t want to let her sister know there were problems

Nugnug posted the following at 1.44pm and edited it at 1.50pm
Re: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003
« Reply #4473 on: Today at 01:44 PM »
“what does not add p to me is she had been self harming rom the age of 8 and her mum seems to have only found out about it recently.

im men of somone in the same house as you was cuting themselves even if they did try and hide wouldent you notice at some time.
« Last Edit: Today at 01:50 PM by nugnug »

The above post have since been deleted but not for another couple of hours or so

Sandra replies:
I've never heard that she was claimed to have been self-harming from the age of 8 - that would have been round about the age she was when her dad died. I know she struggled for her first two years at high school - I always assumed the self-harm began in that period.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452139.html#msg452139

Nugnug then tries to squirm out of what he’s written by deceptively posting the following:
oh soory missread the link i will delete that post.

i wonder hy he was reading her dairy was it just nosey or did he want to know somthing i doubt if she would of left it lying around so he must of looked for it.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452140.html#msg452140

Here’s the links he’s referring to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4195169.stm

How could he possibly have misread anything about an 8 year old [Name removed]?


And note how he attempts to discredit on the Anniversary of [Name removed]’s murder  *&^^&

Speaking of yesterday’s anniversary

Sandra Lean
@SandraLean5
·
Jun 19
Replying to
@Julza40
 and
@jamesenglish0
We're hoping so, Julie-Anne. A new organisation "Long Road to Justice" is being launched on June 30th to try to push for a full case review for this case (and others).
https://mobile.twitter.com/Julza40/status/1141069216050765824
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on July 03, 2019, 12:45:03 PM
I would be mindful that Sandra Lean is crafty.

She says here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fqQ7lnucUMI @ approx 39.12 (and listen to the inflection in her voice)

For what we’ve been allowed access to I would say there’s no doubt that Luke did not do this

But there’s always gonna be, at the back of your mind, what if they got this.. They would have used it - clearly...


She may sound convincing to some people but most certainly not to me.

And watch her face when she says, “they would have used it - clearly.

Would they? Do you think she’s being deceptive?

I’d have another listen to what Sandra Lean says about “stocky man” if I were you.

“Stocky man”

Was a matter of public record at least 17 days after the murder

Thursday 17 July 2003
DETECTIVES hunting the killer of Jodi Jones yesterday appealed for information about a young man dressed in dark clothes who was seen following the schoolgirl on the night she was murdered.
Two witnesses have called the murder incident room in Dalkeith, Midlothian, to report seeing the youth walking behind Jodi on the approach to the path where her body was found 16 days ago.
One of them claimed they saw the same man again a week later, on the evening that police staged a reconstruction of Jodi’s last known movements.
The calls, which are regarded by police as a significant development in their 17-day investigation, came within hours of Jodi’s mother, Judy, making an emotional public appeal for help in catching her daughter’s killer.
It is the first time officers have received a reported sighting of Jodi, 14, after she left her home in Easthouses, near Dalkeith, on the evening of 30 June, heading for a meeting with her boyfriend, Luke Mitchell.
Her body was found shortly before midnight on a track known as Roman Dyke, just a few hundred yards from her front door. She had been stabbed in what police described as a "frenzied" attack and her throat was cut.
Detective Inspector Tom Martin, one of the officers in the case, said: "This is a significant development for the inquiry team. We now have two independent witnesses who have given us good statements about seeing a young woman who is similar in description to Jodi.
"Both witnesses saw the girl walking in Easthouses Road towards the entrance to the Roman Dyke pathway at around 5pm and both also noticed a man walking closely behind the girl.
"Interestingly, one of the witnesses believes he then saw the same man again on Monday 7 July, one week later, the night of the police reconstruction.
"If this is the case, we need to trace this person as a matter of urgency as he may have seen something important on the night that Jodi died."
The man police are keen to trace is described as white, stocky and 5ft 7in to 5ft 10in tall. He had short, tidy brown or ginger hair, perhaps curly or wavy on top.
The witnesses said he appeared to be in his late teens or early 20s and was wearing a dark-coloured sweatshirt top, with maybe a hood, and dark trousers, possibly jogging bottoms. He may also have been carrying a backpack on his shoulder.
A week later, one of the witnesses thinks he saw the same man again in the same area, according to police who believe the person may be local. On that day at 5pm, police staged a reconstruction of Jodi’s last movements, with a policewoman taking the part of Jodi.
According to the male witness, the man was walking in Morris Road at about 6pm on the way to Easthouses Road. He was wearing a denim jacket and carrying a black laptop-style case or holdall.
The witness watched him meet two friends who were of about the same age, probably in their late teens, and saw the friends give each other "high-five" welcoming handshakes before pulling each other into a hug.
One of the young men was on a bicycle and was wearing shorts and the other appeared to be carrying a videotape. Both were wearing dark clothing and the group were standing in Morris Road, just past the Morris Club.
Mr Martin said: "This information is important and it is very helpful that we have two independent witnesses who saw a girl fitting Jodi’s description at a time when we might have expected Jodi to be in that area.
The man seen walking behind this girl could be a crucial witness and was seen again a week later meeting two friends. Who is this man? Do you recognise the description? Could it be you and your friends?
"If you think you know who any of these people may be, please call the police. If you think it may be you but you also think you saw nothing of importance, we still need to talk to you to help us build a complete picture of everyone who was in the area on the night Jodi was murdered."
The witnesses contacted police separately but gave strikingly similar accounts of their sighting of Jodi and the man walking closely behind.
Their calls came within 24 hours of an appeal by Jodi’s relatives for anyone with information that might help the investigation to search their conscience and come forward.
Two of Jodi’s aunts, Agnes Petkevicius and Diane Inkster, attended a press conference to read a statement by Jodi’s mother and speak of the family’s grief over her murder.
Police are still trying to trace a blonde woman with a high ponytail and a miniskirt who was pushing a child in a buggy along Easthouses Road in the direction of Jodi’s house on the evening of the murder.
If the other witness statements are correct, she would have passed Jodi and the man who was following her as she walked along the road.

https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/police-seek-youth-who-trailed-jodi-1-656152


Could the reason Luke Mitchell did not push for disclosure regarding “stocky man” be the same reason Simon Hall didn’t push for disclosure on JamieB and the zenith burglary?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on July 04, 2019, 02:07:22 AM
Sandra Lean
@SandraLean5
You know you're rattling cages when people resort to personal attacks and lies. Gives me a warm glow!!!!
8:06 PM · Jun 3, 2019 · Twitter Web Client
https://mobile.twitter.com/SandraLean5/status/1135623855916158977

She no doubt hopes she’ll get a rise out of people like [Name removed]’s brother so that she can use it against him at some point.

In 2007 she talked about trying to generate some anger https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BSgRnOo2cxI

Is there a pattern emerging?

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on July 05, 2019, 02:29:14 AM
If the confession is indeed from Jodi’s brother of whom was clearly heavily shielded during the investigation

And rightly so!

Tayside Police forensic scientist Susan Ure spoke about the work carried out comparing bloodstains found at the murder scene and other reference samples, taken from members of her family and Luke Mitchel
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4098795.stm
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on July 06, 2019, 10:15:58 PM
Who confessed to the murder?


Corrine Mitchell said a “cop” told Sandra. She omitted to add whether or not he/she was a serving “cop.”


JE: And is there any signs of a retrial

CM: We’re hoping so because since he’s been in we’ve had new evidence umm we’ve had a confession and we’ve had a positive ID from someone seen behind Jodi and it’s the same person who confessed and so if the police or the courts can’t see that as a witness then

JE: Has that ever been put forward to the police, the courts

CM: No no no see it’s only come to light in the last few years
 
JE: So there’s a confession from somebody who actually did it

CM: Yes
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on July 11, 2019, 08:50:07 AM
Corrine Mitchell said a “cop” told Sandra. She omitted to add whether or not he/she was a serving “cop.”


JE: And is there any signs of a retrial

CM: We’re hoping so because since he’s been in we’ve had new evidence umm we’ve had a confession and we’ve had a positive ID from someone seen behind Jodi and it’s the same person who confessed and so if the police or the courts can’t see that as a witness then

JE: Has that ever been put forward to the police, the courts

CM: No no no see it’s only come to light in the last few years
 
JE: So there’s a confession from somebody who actually did it

CM: Yes

@ approx 41.00 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t6ysPeri0O4

CM: Sandra had a cop come and that’s how we... he gave her the gist about the confession because it was him who actually took the confession

we’ve had a confession and we’ve had a positive ID from someone seen behind Jodi and it’s the same person who confessed
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on July 11, 2019, 10:57:37 AM
@ approx 41.00 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t6ysPeri0O4

CM: Sandra had a cop come and that’s how we... he gave her the gist about the confession because it was him who actually took the confession

we’ve had a confession and we’ve had a positive ID from someone seen behind Jodi and it’s the same person who confessed

Sandra leans judgement regarding ANY murder confession should be taken with a pinch of salt
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 20, 2021, 08:21:17 PM
Coolbreeze89 posts here https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=432507

Just thought I would add to this 11 years later - there has been new developments.Someone has confessed to the murder, and it was the same person who was seen following closely behind her before she disappeared onto Roan’s Dyke Path.The source of this can be found in a podcast on YouTube with James English involving Luke’s mother Corrine. I always knew he was innocent. There wasn’t even as much as a dog hair on her body from Mitchell. Someone has been roaming our streets for the best part of 16 years, whilst Luke has been banged up.I reckon she was followed by so-called confession man, intercepted by [Name removed] and [Name removed] along the path who were also ‘in on it’, and either coaxed or coerced through the V-break in the wall. In my opinion, at least two or three, if not more, people were involved. I also don’t buy condom mans story either, therefore would also consider him as a key suspect.Nonetheless, the case has moved on a lot since its early days. The majority of the anomalies can actually be found in Dr Sandra Leans book Innocents Betrayed. A lot of people don’t buy her, but I do. Why would anyone spend the best part of 15 years investigating and analysing a case like this, to then pursue a PhD in criminology if she didn’t have any belief that he was innocent. A lot of people who knew Luke when he was in Polmont Young Offenders Institution said from the very beginning that he was innocent.

and here https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=5987206

”Short Summary

In the summer of 2003, 14-year-old Jodi Jones was found deceased behind a wall in Dalkeith, Edinburgh, by her boyfriend Luke Mitchell’s dog. The body was approximately 13m from a V-break opening in the wall where the stones had deteriorated. The discovery of the body by the dog was agreed at the time by everyone including Jodi’s family, until it came to trial when they changed their statements to incriminate Luke to suggest that he knew where the body was already. This ‘guilty knowledge’ was one of the prosecutions main pieces of “evidence” to convict, suggesting Luke knew it was here as he killed her.

From the discovery of the body, the only suspect who was ever officially investigated and charged with murder was her boyfriend Luke, despite numerous contradictory witness statements and no forensic evidence of him on Jodi, or visa versa. Over 15 years later, Luke is still incarcerated in HMP Shotts, Scotland. He is due to turn 31 this year and has created more memories in prison than he has outside.

Overall, the police investigation from the outset was flawed; other people were witnessed at the murder scene, such as John [Name removed] (Jodis cousin), Gordon [Name removed] (Jodis second cousin), a local cyclist passing named Leonard Kelly who heard strangling sounds from across the wall, Steven Kelly (Jodis sisters fiancé), and a mystery man following Jodi onto the path.

Additionally, numerous items of DNA were recovered from the body, none of which was EVER identified as being from Luke. A moped used by [Name removed] and [Name removed] was also discovered to have been seen leaning against the V-break in the wall at the estimated time of the murder, and they were unable to explain why they were there. They were let free without any further enquiry as Mitchell was already firmly in the frame, and had even lied to police as to when they were there.

The case, in my opinion, was ‘trial-by-media’ and absolutely stinks of a miscarriage of justice. Luke wasn’t there at all. The witness statements could not accurately account for him being there, whilst also accounting for him having time to come home, dispose of incriminating evidence, and go back out again. On the other hand, a mystery man was seen by a witness following closely behind Jodi as she entered one end of the path closest to her house.

Recently, a shocking revelation has since emerged about this man - he admitted it was him behind Jodi, and has confessed to the murder. A senior Police official took the confession from this person and has since informed both Luke Mitchell’s mother, Corrine, and Luke’s Power of Attorney, Dr Sandra Lean (criminologist). This person was witnessed at the time, but has only in the past few years admitted to the murder.

The theory I have is this: mystery man followed Jodi down the path as he knew that’s where she was going (indicating he knew her very well) and was subsequently intercepted by [Name removed] and [Name removed], which occurred through a pre-planned arrangement. Jodi was then either manipulated to climb through the V-break in the wall, or she was forced through. She was then murdered by mystery man, whilst [Name removed] and [Name removed] acted as not only key witnesses, but accomplices.

Corrine and Sandra also hold the theory that the moped and other incriminating evidence was disposed of in a scrapyard following this, as [Name removed] and [Name removed] were simply there to help. It wouldn’t have been difficult for [Name removed] and [Name removed] to get to the locus either, as their house in Reed Drive along The Beeches was directly behind this area.

Overall, Luke was nowhere near the scene at the time of the murder. We now have a solid confession, albeit over 15 years later. We have witness statements who heard strangling sounds from behind the wall. We have witness statements who seen the moped owned by either [Name removed] or [Name removed] learning against the wall, with no sign of anyone. We also, in addition to this, have DNA from multiple other males on the body - none of this was Luke’s.

Does anyone have any other theories?

Names mentioned above, revelations and details of this post can be found in Corrine Mitchell’s interview with James English on YouTube, and also in Sandra’s new book Innocents Betrayed.

Until mystery man confessed, I had my theory that it could have been Jodi’s sisters fiancé, Steven Kelly, who followed her. His sperm was positively identified on the body too, which is absolutely bizarre to say the least given Jodi and her sister stayed in different homes. Nonetheless, I’ve replaced Kelly with mystery man now due to the confession.

Again to recap - mystery man follows Jodi, who is then intercepted by the two on the moped. Jodi is murdered. Body is left to rot, while evidence is destroyed. Family cover their tracks. Luke is blamed for murder.

Jodi was basically ambushed by at least three assailants who were all known to her.

What do you think? Who is this mystery man who has confessed? Does anyone have any inside insight into this case?

Look forward to your input...


Whoever posted the above did so around a year ago

I can’t find the exact date on the board here https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=5987206

Sandra Lean stated she had contacted her publishers to have ‘No Smoke’ withdrawn over a year ago http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg456199.html#msg456199

But the person who has made the above claim has included the name which we now know Sandra Lean lied about in ‘No Smoke’

Sandra’s book ‘No Smoke’ appears to still be on sale

Shouldn’t she be contacting all those who are selling her book - like for example Amazon - in writing to request they stop selling the book with immediate effect?

And shouldn’t she have done this at the time it was brought to her attention!
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 21, 2021, 05:49:06 PM
Yet here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452085.html#msg452085 gordo30 states:

Ok just the 20 on one person( I would t call them suspects)
1. Mental health problems treated by many different drugs exacerbated by the use of recreational drugs
2. Long time dealer of drugs.
3. Long history of violence
4. Use of knives
5. No alibi at at least 1 point that night
6. Never took part in the search for his sibling
7. Plans for that night we’re changed
8. Was seen following Jodi not long after she left the house.
9. Was one of the last people to see the victim alive
10. Would certainly know the area of the murder
11. Was never questioned by the police
12. Was there a danger to Jodi through his dealing with drugs?
13. Were told he never left the house for a long time although he had been out that weekend and was also that day
14. Missed appointment to see psychologist that day.
15. After the murder appeared withdrawn again possibly due to drugs
16. Threatening behaviour afterwards

Ok just the 16 points but many of these were applied circumstantially to Luke and quite a few of these points could be elaborated with more than one example. In all that I still could make up more to fit a circumstantial case. I don’t see the point as this looks like I’m claiming he committed  the murder and that would be wrong because I don’t believe he committed the murder


The above can be found here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg452085.html#msg452085
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 21, 2021, 06:40:52 PM
In June 2019 Sandra Lean stated the following here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451935.html#msg451935

‘When someone is convicted of a serious crime (and sentenced to life imprisonment) it's supposed to be on the basis of proven guilt, beyond reasonable doubt. Let's see what reasonable doubt exists in this case.

(1) DNA from semen on the victim's t-shirt from another man who had no alibi for 12 days. The prosecution explains other semen deposits on the t-shirt and bra as possibly carried there by "rain water diffusion" or "washing machine diffusion". This guy is part of a group who insist on a double check of the path, having gone directly there with no definable reason for doing so. His first words to the police when they arrived were "I suppose you've been to my house first?" He later explained this away as "humour" - minutes after finding his girlfriend's sister's body. He tells police in the 999 call they "phoned the police an hour ago" - much earlier than they actually did call the police and, coincidentally, at the exact time of a mysterious call reporting Jodi missing before she was missing. Admitted experiencing "anger issues". Never considered a suspect.

(2) A man suffering serious psychosis whose medication wasn't working because he was also using recreational drugs. Regular appointment with psychiatrist was cancelled that day apparently because he "wanted to keep smoking cannabis." Was kept away from police attention for the first 9 days of the investigation by others. Alibi from only one person is contradicted by others claimed to have been with him leaving his alibi dependent on just one person whose stories continually change. History of violent outbursts, including attacks with bladed instruments, increasing in the run up to the murder. Direct access to the victim, said to have been at home at the claimed time of the murder but identified by a witness outside of his house, close to the victim. Never considered a suspect.

(3) 2 boys on a moped, whose bike was propped against the wall at the V break, at the precise time the police claimed Jodi was being murdered. They couldn't say where they were or what they were doing. Took 5 days to make themselves known to police following a public appeal for them to come forward. Lied about the time they were on the path (removing themselves for the exact time of the murder, even though it would be several days later before police publicly released the believed time of the murder). One said they didn't come forward because Jodi's Gran told them not to. One cut off his own hair immediately after the murder. Supplied Jodi with cannabis. Was allowed to continue selling cannabis to Luke (who would later also be charged with drug offences). Known to carry knives. One was facing a charge for a serious violent attack on another female at the time of Luke's trial - gave evidence against Luke. Never suspects.

(4) A man masturbated into a condom which was dropped 20 yards from the body on the night of the murder. He wasn't traced for three years. When he was, the distance he said he went down behind the wall meant he would have to have seen the body (but said he didn't). He said that when he heard the following morning that a girl had been found murdered behind the wall, he went out onto Lady path and masturbated behind a tree (within the police cordon). Three arrests for violent attacks by the time he was identified. Never considered a suspect.

(5) After the murder, in 2006, a man driving along a main road spotted a girl walking on a country path in woodland. He swerved into a layby and followed the girl, grabbing her by the hair and pulling her down an embankment, beating her severely and raping her. He had a knife, but the girl managed to struggle free and escape. It was later discovered he was near Roan's Dyke path on the afternoon Jodi was murdered. Never considered a suspect. And to this day, people say there have never been any similar attacks in the area since Luke was convicted!

I could go on. Beyond reasonable doubt means ensuring anyone else who could have been responsible is ruled out on solid, factual evidence. That didn't happen. Four of the people mentioned above knew Jodi well (and she them). All of them lied at some point during the investigation (or others lied for them).

So there you have it. Without naming a single name or pointing a single finger, can anyone reading this factual information seriously claim Luke Mitchell was convicted "beyond reasonable doubt"?


I suspect the above are the 5 who will be referred to in the forthcoming firecracker film production produced by Stephen Bennett

Robert Greens who Sandra Lean refers to above (5) is also mentioned by her here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uK7OVE_5L7Y&feature=youtu.be
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 21, 2021, 07:47:35 PM
Re the Bamber forum - The cracks are well and truly showing between Sandra, Nugnug and Gordo

In response to Sandra here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452103.html#msg452103

 Gordo30 posted:
“It doesn’t look out of place though, Jodi might have wanted a different form of relationship with her sister, friends and closeness to the point where she wanted to be more like her. She may have looked up to her sister and didn’t want to let her sister know there were problems

Nugnug posted the following at 1.44pm and edited it at 1.50pm
Re: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003
« Reply #4473 on: Today at 01:44 PM »
“what does not add p to me is she had been self harming rom the age of 8 and her mum seems to have only found out about it recently.

im men of somone in the same house as you was cuting themselves even if they did try and hide wouldent you notice at some time.
« Last Edit: Today at 01:50 PM by nugnug »

The above post have since been deleted but not for another couple of hours or so

Sandra replies:
I've never heard that she was claimed to have been self-harming from the age of 8 - that would have been round about the age she was when her dad died. I know she struggled for her first two years at high school - I always assumed the self-harm began in that period.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452139.html#msg452139

Nugnug then tries to squirm out of what he’s written by deceptively posting the following:
oh soory missread the link i will delete that post.

i wonder hy he was reading her dairy was it just nosey or did he want to know somthing i doubt if she would of left it lying around so he must of looked for it.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452140.html#msg452140

Here’s the links he’s referring to http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4195169.stm

How could he possibly have misread anything about an 8 year old [Name removed]?


And note how he attempts to discredit on the Anniversary of [Name removed]’s murder  *&^^&

When is Jodi’s brother alleged to have seen the diary http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg452103.html#msg452103

Sandra Lean states,
‘In the same statement, Judy said Joseph told her about Jodi writing in her diary that she wanted to move out of the family home and move in with Yvonne Walker, which doesn't really fit with the idyllic, blissful home-life portrayed at trial - Janine moved out three years earlier, also aged 14. Why would two 14 year old daughters both want to leave home at such a young age?

This is so wrong on so many levels
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 21, 2021, 08:32:50 PM
Sandra Lean states today,

‘I wanted to address MP Liam Kerr's comment that “Clearly this documentary will only cause more distress to a family who’ve already suffered so much."  Does Mr Kerr consider how unbelievably cruel it is if Jodi's family have been given false closure? Because, if the wrong person has been convicted, that is exactly what has happened - whose responsibility would that be?


I strongly suspect ‘Murder in a small town’ will be a scam like Netflix’s ‘Making a murderer’ turned out to be

How making a murderer tossed truth aside to make entertainment
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=U_QhMN4nyRs&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1IRBchE8tGHwZyT17ZS1RcRUJAjQrOB_JXWycZefYy_LgqiIZwjkAu3PU

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 21, 2021, 09:38:51 PM
There’s now a ‘was there justice for Jodi and Luke’ Facebook group  *&^^&

Set up by someone who calls herself Sharon sunshiney

Here she is interviewing Sandra Lean https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5W0fnJqhih0
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Angelo222 on February 21, 2021, 10:34:30 PM
There’s now a ‘was there justice for Jodi and Luke’ Facebook group  *&^^&

Set up by someone who calls herself Sharon sunshiney

Here she is interviewing Sandra Lean https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=5W0fnJqhih0

So boring listening to Sandra Lean waffling on about the same old crap. You would think she had learned her lesson from the numerous cases she already publicly supported where the guilty later confessed. What an idiot!

Mitchell is as guilty as sin and the evidence proves it.

I don't think we should be promoting any of Sandra Leans fantasies Nicholas!
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 21, 2021, 11:02:05 PM


Mitchell is as guilty as sin and the evidence proves it.


It does - I agree

Sandra slipped up when she posted this

From police interview heard at trial, luke said
Quote
She liked that top, she like, she bought some of her own stuff, I mean, the clothes, the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night. I think they were borrowed off her sister.


reproduced by WakeyWakey here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg458404.html#msg458404

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 21, 2021, 11:05:28 PM
I don't think we should be promoting any of Sandra Leans fantasies Nicholas!

No we shouldn’t - helpful though for study purposes  8((()*/
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 23, 2021, 05:14:42 PM
Re the alleged confession - could it have come from one of these 2 PI’s?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 23, 2021, 05:54:41 PM

Corrine Mitchell refers to her son as normal but so did Cindy Watts about her son https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YHMFQzyAAu8


‘Analysing Chris Watts and Cindy Watts on the phone’

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YD5P7xVS0rU

I don’t think Corrine Mitchell mentioned the bottles of urine found in Luke’s bedroom during the James English podcast - though found her comments on JF & the ‘condom’ interesting

Corrine Mitchell on JF:
He must have been the kind of person who got off on seeing a dead body - he must have seen her where he was - he must of. But why use a condom for masturbating

Wonder what Luke made of the hedgehog story told by Corrine?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 23, 2021, 07:09:45 PM
Also according to Corrine Mitchell - to James English

‘I mean a lot of her injuries were done after death. So it’s been somebody who really didn’t give a shit about being caught’
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on February 26, 2021, 01:04:56 AM
Just listened to the podcast - James English didn't seem to push Corinne at all as to *who* confessed?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2021, 07:20:12 AM
So boring listening to Sandra Lean waffling on about the same old crap. You would think she had learned her lesson from the numerous cases she already publicly supported where the guilty later confessed. What an idiot!

Mitchell is as guilty as sin and the evidence proves it.

I don't think we should be promoting any of Sandra Leans fantasies Nicholas!
Mitchell may be guilty but the evidence against him is very thin imo.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 07:53:32 AM
I also find it interesting how Sandra Lean is suggesting the following here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452099.html#msg452099

I was thinking about the claimed 20 pieces of solid evidence against Luke (that's been deleted now) - what's always interested me are the number of pieces of "evidence" that applied equally, and in some cases, moreso, to others than they did to Luke - so, drug use, connection with knives, "dark" interests, etc, etc. There are at least 5 others to whom all of these apply. Of those five, we can add serious mental health conditions (which didn't apply to Luke), previous attacks on women[/b] (which didn't apply to Luke), attacks with bladed intruments (which didn't apply to Luke), long histories of violence and/or involvement with the police (which didn't apply to Luke)[/color]
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452099.html#msg452099

Dark interests” would suggest to me she has finally conceded Luke Mitchell’s interests in satanism aren’t/weren’t normal per se.

Left largely to his own devices he became defiant, violent and brooding with an unhealthy fascination with knives, the occult and drugs. He was first brought to the attention of the mental health profession aged just 11, following a fight at King’s Park Primary in Dalkeith. Although the incident was just a minor skirmish with another pupil, Mitchell’s attitude was sufficiently troublesome to warrant a referral to a school psychiatrist. However, there appears to have been little further action taken by the education authorities or his parents to curb his behaviour.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/natural-born-killer-1-1401861

Jodi Jones killer Luke Mitchell demands right to study Satanic textbooks in prison due to his 'religious beliefs'

JODI Jones’s killer Luke Mitchell has demanded the right to be given Satanic textbooks in jail because of his “religious beliefs”.

Mitchell wants six books including The Devil’s Notebook and Satan Speaks, claiming it’s his human right to have access to the occult materials.

Mitchell, 25, also wants a copy of The Satanic Bible, which calls for followers to create a lawless world where there is no right or wrong and where human sacrifice and murder is not only tolerated but encouraged.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/jodi-jones-killer-luke-mitchell-3407242

Something else I forgot to mention was that Sandra Lean had a falling out with Mrs Mitchell some time ago and Lean ceased to have any involvement with the case.


Was a factor for the alleged ‘falling out’ anything to do with Luke Mitchell ‘demanding’ ‘the right to be given Satanic textbooks in jail because of his “religious beliefs” I wonder?

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 08:04:30 AM
Mitchell may be guilty but the evidence against him is very thin imo.

The evidence was thin in the Simon Hall case - as it can be in cases like this
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 08:07:15 AM
Just listened to the podcast - James English didn't seem to push Corinne at all as to *who* confessed?

Don’t you find that odd? Someone’s allegedly confessed but James English didn’t want ALL the details?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 08:11:07 AM
It does - I agree

Sandra slipped up when she posted this

From police interview heard at trial, luke said
Quote
She liked that top, she like, she bought some of her own stuff, I mean, the clothes, the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night. I think they were borrowed off her sister.


reproduced by WakeyWakey here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg458404.html#msg458404

How did Luke Mitchell know Jodi had borrowed her sisters clothes on the night of the murder and when did he see her in ‘the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night’ ?

If the ‘cords,jeans’ were used to tie her arms up behind her back - how did he see them when he found her?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2021, 08:26:16 AM
How did Luke Mitchell know Jodi had borrowed her sisters clothes on the night of the murder and when did he see her in ‘the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night’ ?

If the ‘cords,jeans’ were used to tie her arms up behind her back - how did he see them when he found her?
Which police interview did this come from?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2021, 08:26:44 AM
Don’t you find that odd? Someone’s allegedly confessed but James English didn’t want ALL the details?
Edited out for legal reasons?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 08:28:32 AM
Also according to Corrine Mitchell - to James English

‘I mean a lot of her injuries were done after death. So it’s been somebody who really didn’t give a shit about being caught’

Like someone ‘who really didn't give a sh*t about’ being filmed by the media on the day of Jodi Jones funeral?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 08:32:22 AM
Edited out for legal reasons?

Unlikely - ‘Anything Goes’ isn’t that the whole idea of James English’s podcasts?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 08:36:24 AM
There was a reason why Luke Mitchell didn’t give evidence in his murder trial and I do not think it was because Donald Findlay QC ‘didn’t allow him to’
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 08:38:55 AM
Why didn’t the channel 5 documentary explore the enmeshed relationship Corrine Mitchell and Luke appear to have?

Boys can become enmeshed with either or both parents, but more typically become enmeshed with their mother. A boy who has played the role of surrogate companion to his mother feels engulfed, enmeshed, smothered, and intruded upon. His wants and needs have merged with hers and the boy's identity is lost.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 08:55:02 AM
In Part 2, Sandra Lean is see driving into the park and trying to make the point that Luke would have had to walk past numerous houses after the murder.  WRONG!  BULLSHIT ALERT!   There is a shortcut from the end of the lane, across the main road, across the river and up the back of the houses to the Mitchell home.  Sandra Lean must think were bloody stupid.

You’d have thought John Sallens and Michael Neill would have explored this - why didn’t they?

Why wasn’t a reconstruction done showing that it was possible for Luke Mitchell to have washed his hands and face - for example - in a nearby stream/river before heading home and changing his clothes and going back out to get dirt under his nails?

And why did the documentary keep referring to the murder as a ‘bloodbath’? Didn’t the forensics say there were only droplets of blood found?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 09:01:49 AM
Twitter comments ⬇️

‘You are a complete arse if you believe that the Luke Mitchell documentary makes him innocent, you can’t splutter “Luke Mitchell is innocent” if you have only watched a one sided ‘documentary’ , look into the case and research it. #lukemitchell #murderinasmalltown

‘Also completely disturbed by the ‘criminologist’ Sandra Lean and her lack of sensitivity during her interview segments. Smiling away like a Cheshire Cat.

‘Carried out an investigation by speaking to his own ma and her mate Sandra that is not an investigation I’m afraid from these two cowboys
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Admin on February 26, 2021, 09:18:49 AM
You’d have thought John Sallens and Michael Neill would have explored this - why didn’t they?

Why wasn’t a reconstruction done showing that it was possible for Luke Mitchell to have washed his hands and face - for example - in a nearby stream/river before heading home and changing his clothes and going back out to get dirt under his nails?

And why did the documentary keep referring to the murder as a ‘bloodbath’? Didn’t the forensics say there were only droplets of blood found?

Excellent questions but I fear the defence won't want to answer them.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2021, 09:22:27 AM
I have to agree the programme was very one-sided.  Is there a more balanced programme or book about the case?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 09:26:58 AM
Excellent questions but I fear the defence won't want to answer them.

Sandra Lean misleading again with the words and actions of ‘hacking off’ their hair the day after the murder  *&^^&

What’s unusual about a boy (or girl) cutting their thick curly hair shorter during the summer months - I view this as nothing more than a coincidence

Don’t most households have a pair of clippers in their bathrooms?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 09:27:49 AM
Excellent questions but I fear the defence won't want to answer them.

Of course they won’t because it doesn’t suit their one sided narrative and apparent agenda

You’d have thought after the Adrian Prout, Billy Middleton and Simon Hall fiascos Sandra Lean would have learned lessons

And what happened to her Matthew Hamlen podcasts - did Hamlen finally confess?

Seems the above link is no longer working now either but the link https://www.listennotes.com/podcasts/justice-in/episode-1-zKr4msUAvpg/amp/?__twitter_impression=true reads:

Dr Sandra Lean presents Episode 1 of a 6 part series on Matthew’s case,  examining the horrific murder of an old lady, the relentless pursuit, not once, but twice, of a man who insists he is completely innocent, a police investigation spanning 8 years and two trials reportedly costing together over £7 million, that leave many, many unanswered questions
”Horrifyingly, the meticulous grandmother, who’d stayed glamorous into her sunset years, had her trousers around her knees.
Her underpants had also partially been pulled down.”

(Real People 4 Oct 2018 - Murder Map)

Matthew Hamlen said he could not be sure if he had sex with Georgina Edmonds
https://www.hampshirechronicle.co.uk/news/14265690.matthew-hamlen-said-he-could-not-be-sure-if-he-had-sex-with-georgina-edmonds/
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 11:09:50 AM
Will leave this here ⬇️

One asks was the two parter  put out solely with the view of trying to convince of his innocence rather  than a impartial view? if its the former then casual observers might be convinced.

Of course it was

I think it’s totally and utterly appalling - especially after Sandra Leans involvement in the Simon Hall case

A lot of people are now accusing Jodi’s brother of murder  *&^^&

And Sandra lean knows this is what people do when they don’t hear all the facts - and no one can say the documentary presented all of the facts
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on February 26, 2021, 11:27:53 AM
Don’t you find that odd? Someone’s allegedly confessed but James English didn’t want ALL the details?

Yes, I do, that's why I highlighted it
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 11:31:53 AM
Yes, I do, that's why I highlighted it

What about this ⬇️ a comment someone has made on twitter

’I have to say for Jodi Jones’ family having to relive their daughters murder after that documentary must be so upsetting but if I was her mum I would 100% want the killer to be brought to justice, even if that meant re opening the case. #murderinasmalltown #LukeMitchell #corrupt

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 11:34:01 AM
What about this ⬇️ a comment someone has made on twitter

’I have to say for Jodi Jones’ family having to relive their daughters murder after that documentary must be so upsetting but if I was her mum I would 100% want the killer to be brought to justice, even if that meant re opening the case. #murderinasmalltown #LukeMitchell #corrupt

The family of Jodi Jones would have had access to the same case papers as Sandra Lean

If they thought someone else murdered their daughter, sister, granddaughter, niece, loved one - don’t you think they too would have had questions ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on February 26, 2021, 11:37:03 AM
What about this ⬇️ a comment someone has made on twitter

’I have to say for Jodi Jones’ family having to relive their daughters murder after that documentary must be so upsetting but if I was her mum I would 100% want the killer to be brought to justice, even if that meant re opening the case. #murderinasmalltown #LukeMitchell #corrupt

Yeh it's a daft comment but victims families often think the convicted person is guilty even after other evidence comes out. Eg. the WM3, Adnan Syed, Sion Jenkins possibly?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 11:39:49 AM
Yeh it's a daft comment but victims families often think the convicted person is guilty even after other evidence comes out. Eg. the WM3, Adnan Syed, Sion Jenkins possibly?

The WM3 pleaded guilty to the murders - of Steve Branch, Michael Moore and Christopher Byers - in a plea deal

Sion Jenkins has yet to prove his innocence

Adman Syed is incarcerated

All of the above 👆🏽are guilty from my viewpoint
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 11:40:51 AM
Yeh it's a daft comment but victims families often think the convicted person is guilty even after other evidence comes out. Eg. the WM3, Adnan Syed, Sion Jenkins possibly?

‘Daft’ or disrespectful ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: jixy on February 26, 2021, 11:46:04 AM
It does - I agree

Sandra slipped up when she posted this

From police interview heard at trial, luke said
Quote
She liked that top, she like, she bought some of her own stuff, I mean, the clothes, the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night. I think they were borrowed off her sister.


reproduced by WakeyWakey here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg458404.html#msg458404

Jodi was wearing the same trousers to school that day
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 11:46:37 AM
You’d have thought John Sallens and Michael Neill would have explored this - why didn’t they?


Have John Sallens and Michael Neill along with all those questioning Luke Mitchell’s guilt fallen for the fallacies of credibility ? Certainly appears this way to me
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 11:48:25 AM
Jodi was wearing the same trousers to school that day

Luke Mitchell said Night

It does - I agree

Sandra slipped up when she posted this

From police interview heard at trial, luke said
Quote
She liked that top, she like, she bought some of her own stuff, I mean, the clothes, the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night. I think they were borrowed off her sister.


reproduced by WakeyWakey here http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg458404.html#msg458404

Aren’t we meant to believe he didn’t see her that night?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on February 26, 2021, 11:50:30 AM
‘Daft’ or disrespectful ?

Daft.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 11:50:38 AM
Luke Mitchell stated in one of his police statements re what Jodi was wearing,

She liked that top, she like, she bought some of her own stuff, I mean, the clothes, the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night. I think they were borrowed off her sister.”

How would Luke know what Jodi was wearing that night unless he’d seen her?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on February 26, 2021, 11:53:17 AM
The WM3 pleaded guilty to the murders - of Steve Branch, Michael Moore and Christopher Byers - in a plea deal


The WM3 took an Alford plea and maintain their innocence.

The point I'm making is that victims families aren't always right.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Angelo222 on February 26, 2021, 11:55:10 AM
Have John Sallens and Michael Neill along with all those questioning Luke Mitchell’s guilt fallen for the fallacies of credibility ? Certainly appears this way to me

I would say fallen for the cash!   It seems to be a common occurrence in these cases to employ disgraced detectives.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 11:57:56 AM
The WM3 took an Alford plea and maintain their innocence.

The WM3 pleaded guilty to murdering Steve Branch, Michael Moore and Christopher Byers - that’s what an Alford plea is

If they didn’t maintain their innocence how do you think the public would treat them for having murdered these 3 young boys?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 12:00:13 PM
The WM3 took an Alford plea and maintain their innocence.

The point I'm making is that victims families aren't always right.

Neither are ‘criminologists’ - come hypnotherapists - like Sandra Lean (Her history speaks for itself) or ex cops who appear to have left the police force under a cloud of suspicion
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on February 26, 2021, 12:04:01 PM
The WM3 pleaded guilty to murdering Steve Branch, Michael Moore and Christopher Byers - that’s what an Alford plea is

If they didn’t maintain their innocence how do you think the public would treat them for having murdered these 3 young boys?

I am aware of what an Alford plea is, thank you.

They wouldn't have been released if they hadn't maintained their innocence and campaigned for their release.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on February 26, 2021, 12:06:04 PM
Neither are ‘criminologists’ - come hypnotherapists - like Sandra Lean (Her history speaks for itself) or ex cops who appear to have left the police force under a cloud of suspicion

Obviously
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 12:07:01 PM
I am aware of what an Alford plea is, thank you.

They wouldn't have been released if they hadn't maintained their innocence and campaigned for their release.

You appear to be referring to them having committed innocence fraud

Which it’s crystal clear Luke Mitchell and co are attempting to do from my viewpoint
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 12:24:20 PM
Did Sandra Lean publish Luke Mitchell’s police statements in there entirety in her 2nd book and if so can someone please upload them to the forum  8((()*/

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 26, 2021, 12:56:28 PM
Luke Mitchell stated in one of his police statements re what Jodi was wearing,

She liked that top, she like, she bought some of her own stuff, I mean, the clothes, the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night. I think they were borrowed off her sister.”

How would Luke know what Jodi was wearing that night unless he’d seen her?
He did see her, after she was murdered and still presumably wearing the same clothes?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 01:00:01 PM
He did see her, after she was murdered and still presumably wearing the same clothes?

Jodi sadly was found naked apart from her socks

How did Luke see her cord jean trousers which had been used to tie Jodi’s hands together?

And what do his police statements say regarding this and did they change or vary?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Bullseye on February 26, 2021, 01:05:26 PM
Did Luke see her cord jean trousers which had been used to tie Jodi’s hands together?
If it was during police questioning maybe he was asked about it, or shown a photo. Without full information of where and how that statement was made it means nothing.

Bottom line there is too much reasonable doubt in this case for me. I welcome an independent review, go over everything again properly, get the dna retested and see if they can find out for sure if it was Luke or not for everyone sake both Luke and Jodi’s family. I see over 5000 people have signed the petition already, seems the documentary had the right impact.

Some say it’s old news but not for people who don’t know much about the case, it’s a good introduction to why people think he is innocent.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 01:09:31 PM
If it was during police questioning maybe he was asked about it, or shown a photo. Without full information of where and how that statement was made it means nothing.

Bottom line there is too much reasonable doubt in this case for me. I welcome an independent review, go over everything again properly, get the dna retested and see if they can find out for sure if it was Luke or not for everyone sake both Luke and Jodi’s family. I see over 5000 people have signed the petition already, seems the documentary had the right impact.

Some say it’s old news but not for people who don’t know much about the case, it’s a good introduction to why people think he is innocent.

Independent reviews cost money

How much was spent on Luke Mitchell’s trial

Sandra Lean is a charlatan in my opinion - her past behaviour has proved this especially (For me) in relation to the exposure of Simon Hall’s guilt

I suspect fulll disclosure of Luke Mitchell’s witness statements could help answer many questions - don’t you?

Plus ⬇️

"Donald Findlay QC, defending Luke Mitchell, suggested to Ms Ure that DNA could be found in a completely "sinister place but have a wholly innocent explanation" to which she agreed.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Bullseye on February 26, 2021, 01:15:31 PM
If there is even a small chance a 15 year old boy has been in jail for the past 15 years for something he didn’t do and the person who killed Jodi is still out there then it should not matter how much it costs, we should be sure. You may be but it seems lots of people including me are not so sure. An independent review might put this all to rest once and for all, surely that’s what everyone wants, including both Luke and Jodi’s families. Must be so hard for her family to have this dragged up every few years. If he is guilty that’s what the independent review will confirm.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 01:24:04 PM
Must be so hard for her family to have this dragged up every few years. If he is guilty that’s what the independent review will confirm.

Luke Mitchell has the SCCRC like all other offenders

Maybe Sandra Lean should publish their previous statements of reasons first?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 01:47:07 PM
It is possible one of the individuals (Or their family members) who have been wrongly accused following the airing of the ‘show’ have finally taken legal action

Vigilante justice is not the way forward
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: jixy on February 26, 2021, 01:53:08 PM
It is possible one of the individuals (Or their family members) who have been wrongly accused following the airing of the ‘show’ have finally taken legal action

Vigilante justice is not the way forward

But this is the way forward?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 01:58:06 PM
But this is the way forward?

For people like Jeremy Bamber and Luke Mitchell/Sandra Lean maybe but it won’t make any difference to Mitchell’s murder conviction

As I’ve already pointed out - he needs to apply to the SCCRC
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on February 26, 2021, 02:08:59 PM
In this interview, 7 minutes in, Sandra Lean says Luke didn't buy the Marilyn Manson CD (Golden Age of Grotesque), he bought a music magazine and it came free with that. Is that true? I don't think TGAOG was ever given away free.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE5rMioQIlU&ab_channel=SgiathFilms
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 02:39:17 PM
In this interview, 7 minutes in, Sandra Lean says Luke didn't buy the Marilyn Manson CD (Golden Age of Grotesque), he bought a music magazine and it came free with that. Is that true? I don't think TGAOG was ever given away free.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE5rMioQIlU&ab_channel=SgiathFilms

According to wiki ‘Golden age of the grotesque’ was released and promoted on February 18, 2003,

No it wasn’t

18th February 2003 was when ‘Manson revealed the album's release date and track listing via the band's official website
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Golden_Age_of_Grotesque

Wonder what Jodi told Luke about this - she must have known of it’s possible forthcoming release date if her sister was a fan surely?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 02:56:05 PM
In this interview, 7 minutes in, Sandra Lean says Luke didn't buy the Marilyn Manson CD (Golden Age of Grotesque), he bought a music magazine and it came free with that. Is that true? I don't think TGAOG was ever given away free.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vE5rMioQIlU&ab_channel=SgiathFilms

On what date did Janine buy the CD - presuming she did if she was a fan and had everything on Manson like Corrine claimed to James English and did Luke ever listen to the music at Jodi’s house or elsewhere?

Not that I think the music Luke Mitchell listened to motivated him to choose to murder Jodi
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 03:06:11 PM
This ⬇️
’Though violently murdered with masses of blood at the crime scene  *&^^&

from a Debra Claridge who has been ‘following’ Sandra Lean for sometime

Sandra will say she doesn’t have time to correct Ms Claridge but in reality I suspect this is exactly what she & Luke and Corrine Mitchell hope to achieve?

There wasn’t Debra - the blood was described as droplets
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 04:58:54 PM
But this is the way forward?

The channel 5 2 part doc on convicted murderer Luke Mitchell was - for me - an example of innocence fraud

‘Vigilante justice’ is what can follow after the airing of these types of one sided bias ‘shows’

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 06:59:25 PM
I’m of the firm view the shot of the computer with [Name removed]’s name on it in part 2 was deliberate

My messages are still open btw
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 07:28:46 PM
Corrine Mitchell mentioned in the documentary something about ‘legal fees’

Was she referring to ‘legal fees’ for when she was sued for quarter of a million pounds?

Murderer Mitchell’s mother sued for £¼m over deadly caravan’
https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-scotsman/20110128/281900179671888


Was this yet another play on words?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 07:33:24 PM
Who is walking Corrine Mitchell’s dog - looked to me like she’d got another ‘fast’ walking German shepherd?

What was it she said about ‘being behind a German shepherd’ to James English?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 07:54:08 PM
the second part has nothing to do with whether or not luke guilty or not but speaks to the motives of those involved in innocence fraud

If Luke Mitchell was innocent - he’s not - but if he was he would have no problem publishing his police statements

Why hasn’t Sandra Lean published these on his behalf ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 08:22:21 PM
‘Mia Found-her’ 

the ‘her’ could suggest contempt (unconscious) towards Jodi by the author

Can’t upload a screenshot - would if I could
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: WakeyWakey on February 26, 2021, 08:44:18 PM
Nicholas, this account name was used by corrine on email addresses back in the wronglyaccusedperson website days
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 09:03:47 PM
Nicholas, this account name was used by corrine on email addresses back in the wronglyaccusedperson website days

Is that right - Cindy Watts springs to mind https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aYrE4vjI13A
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 26, 2021, 11:06:03 PM
If Luke Mitchell was innocent - he’s not - but if he was he would have no problem publishing his police statements

Why hasn’t Sandra Lean published these on his behalf ?

Or Corrine - now that she appears to have published the BBC Frontline doc in full where she claims she didn’t ask her son if he’d murdered Jodi

Publish Luke’s police statements in full
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 27, 2021, 01:46:34 AM
Nicholas, this account name was used by corrine on email addresses back in the wronglyaccusedperson website days

So it could be linked to anyone who knew the above?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 27, 2021, 11:55:37 AM
Dignified silence of Jodi Jones's mum was last thing she could do for murdered daughter by Jane Hamilton
27th Feb 2021


’Her name was Jodi. She was 14. She liked music, especially Nirvana, she loved her family and she was popular. Sunflowers were her favourite.

She was described as a typical teenager who was the “sunshine to a lot of people.” On June 30, 2003, she was brutally murdered.

The day she died, I was 4000 miles away with a bad phone signal and no idea about the tragic story unfolding near my home town.

I knew something major had happened when I was given a message by the hotel to contact my boss “urgently”. By this time the missing teenager had become the murdered schoolgirl.

I arrived back in Scotland a few days later and immediately set to work. Rumours had been swirling that her boyfriend, Luke Mitchell, was a suspect but nothing was confirmed. Parents were warned to keep their children at home or close by. I remember thinking there was a smell of fear in the air and immense sadness.

Over the next few months, theories, potential suspects, motives and sometimes rumours kept us busy. Police appeals for information were a regular occurrence.

I’d come across the officers in the inquiry a few times in the course of my work and they were all known as experienced, solid, hard-working detectives.

Contrary to popular belief, the investigation was kept “tight” and any leaks were swiftly denied or stamped on in an effort by police to ensure their investigation remained as confidential as possible.


More here https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/dignified-silence-jodi-joness-mum-23575874.amp?__twitter_impression=true


Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on February 27, 2021, 01:14:38 PM
Dignified silence of Jodi Jones's mum was last thing she could do for murdered daughter by Jane Hamilton
27th Feb 2021


’Her name was Jodi. She was 14. She liked music, especially Nirvana, she loved her family and she was popular. Sunflowers were her favourite.

She was described as a typical teenager who was the “sunshine to a lot of people.” On June 30, 2003, she was brutally murdered.

The day she died, I was 4000 miles away with a bad phone signal and no idea about the tragic story unfolding near my home town.

I knew something major had happened when I was given a message by the hotel to contact my boss “urgently”. By this time the missing teenager had become the murdered schoolgirl.

I arrived back in Scotland a few days later and immediately set to work. Rumours had been swirling that her boyfriend, Luke Mitchell, was a suspect but nothing was confirmed. Parents were warned to keep their children at home or close by. I remember thinking there was a smell of fear in the air and immense sadness.

Over the next few months, theories, potential suspects, motives and sometimes rumours kept us busy. Police appeals for information were a regular occurrence.

I’d come across the officers in the inquiry a few times in the course of my work and they were all known as experienced, solid, hard-working detectives.

Contrary to popular belief, the investigation was kept “tight” and any leaks were swiftly denied or stamped on in an effort by police to ensure their investigation remained as confidential as possible.


More here https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/dignified-silence-jodi-joness-mum-23575874.amp?__twitter_impression=true

I’m sure Jodi’s mum isn’t to chuffed that this churnalist is making money from her grief. She doesn’t talk to the press for a reason.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 27, 2021, 03:23:07 PM
Nicholas, this account name was used by corrine on email addresses back in the wronglyaccusedperson website days

So it could be linked to anyone who knew the above?

Or someone attempting to give the impression it’s Corrine ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 27, 2021, 07:22:11 PM
If there is even a small chance a 15 year old boy has been in jail for the past 15 years for something he didn’t do and the person who killed Jodi is still out there then it should not matter how much it costs, we should be sure. You may be but it seems lots of people including me are not so sure. An independent review might put this all to rest once and for all, surely that’s what everyone wants, including both Luke and Jodi’s families. Must be so hard for her family to have this dragged up every few years. If he is guilty that’s what the independent review will confirm.

I completely agree BUT we cannot have falsehoods bounded about in public as has happened with this latest Channel 5 effort.

Sandra Lean has libelled several lads and that is not justice by any standards.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2021, 07:23:29 PM
I completely agree BUT we cannot have falsehoods bounded about in public as has happened with this latest Channel 5 effort.
What specifically was false?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Bullseye on February 27, 2021, 07:39:44 PM
I completely agree BUT we cannot have falsehoods bounded about in public as has happened with this latest Channel 5 effort.

Sandra Lean has libelled several lads and that is not justice by any standards.

If there where falsehoods I agree, but I’m not sure what you are referring to? I was surprised they named names in the doc, but where these names not already in the public domain through news reports of the case and court records? The way I took it is that the doc was pointing out other lines of enquiries the police could have took, but were not investigating as thoroughly as it could have been, which is why the independent review would be good.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 27, 2021, 07:42:25 PM
What specifically was false?

I'm not going to go into it tonight but I gave you an example the other day when I explained how Luke Mitchell could get home without going on the main road. Plenty of opportunity to hide clothing or a knife and wash.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 27, 2021, 07:46:24 PM
If there where falsehoods I agree, but I’m not sure what you are referring to? I was surprised they named names in the doc, but where these names not already in the public domain through news reports of the case and court records? The way I took it is that the doc was pointing out other lines of enquiries the police could have took, but were not investigating as thoroughly as it could have been, which is why the independent review would be good.

Only the police know what lines of enquiry were followed and they would have been guilty of a dereliction of duty if they didn't pursue other suspects. No doubt this will all come out in the wash.

I originally supported Luke Mitchell, I even have him information for his lawyer Donald Findlay when I talked with him at the High Court in Edinburgh. When I looked into the case however I found serious inconsistencies in the family's behaviour after the murder. Those alarm bells are still ringing.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 27, 2021, 07:53:23 PM
A reminder to ALL posters that comments should be on topic and relevant. On this thread we aren't interested in gossip or what Sandra Lean's daughters may or may not have done, it's IRRELEVANT!

If this continues I will lock these threads.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on February 27, 2021, 08:26:10 PM
Only the police know what lines of enquiry were followed and they would have been guilty of a dereliction of duty if they didn't pursue other suspects. No doubt this will all come out in the wash.

I originally supported Luke Mitchell, I even have him information for his lawyer Donald Findlay when I talked with him at the High Court in Edinburgh. When I looked into the case however I found serious inconsistencies in the family's behaviour after the murder. Those alarm bells are still ringing.

Can you give more details regarding the serious inconsistencies?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 27, 2021, 08:40:29 PM
Can you give more details regarding the serious inconsistencies?

It has been gone over numerous times in the past. Both Corrine and Shane Mitchell were warned that perjury was a serious matter. Why on earth would a prosecutor feel the need to do that?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on February 27, 2021, 08:50:28 PM
It has been gone over numerous times in the past. Both Corrine and Shane Mitchell were warned that perjury was a serious matter. Why on earth would a prosecutor feel the need to do that?

I’m sure every aspect of this case has been gone over numerous times but I’m new to this particular board so perhaps you could humour me this once?

As to why the prosecutor would issue that particular warning, for the same reason you are highlighting it now, to make people doubt their testimony.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Bullseye on February 27, 2021, 09:00:12 PM
It has been gone over numerous times in the past. Both Corrine and Shane Mitchell were warned that perjury was a serious matter. Why on earth would a prosecutor feel the need to do that?

It’s very serious but neither of them were charged?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 27, 2021, 09:41:46 PM
I’m sure Jodi’s mum isn’t to chuffed that this churnalist is making money from her grief. She doesn’t talk to the press for a reason.

There’s something extremely wrong with your observations

What about the channel 5 show and other news articles

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 27, 2021, 09:58:50 PM
It’s very serious but neither of them were charged?

I think they were extremely lucky.

Anyway, I was thinking about the whole Shane didn't see or hear him discussion while I was out for my chicken curry. It's been a few years since I delved into this case but these are the facts which I will repeat for the benefit of new readers.

Corinne claimed that Luke was home burning the dinner soon after the murder took place but has no way of backing up that claim. Luke's older brother Shane stated that he came home to an empty house and went on the computer to look at porn, keeping an ear for anyone coming in. He was very clear that Luke was not at home.

Luke for his part claimed he went home after hanging about waiting for Jodi. She was supposed to have met him but never turned up. He claims that he went home and started to prepare dinner. He makes no mention of Shane being in the house.

The Mitchell home consisted of a ground floor and an upstairs, it wasn't a big house. If Luke had been at home while Shane was upstairs, wouldn't the latter have heard Luke come in.  Wouldn't he have heard him rattling about downstairs, opening cupboards, cooker door etc?  Wouldn't he have heard him on the phone?

According to Shane none of this happened, he just wasn't in the house.

(https://www-deadlinenews-co-uk.cdn.ampproject.org/i/s/www.deadlinenews.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/MITCHELL_HOUSE_SOLD_DN04-digi.jpg)

In my opinion, this very crucial piece of evidence by Luke Mitchell's brother was key to the prosecution's case and could very well have persuaded the jury.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Bullseye on February 27, 2021, 10:21:16 PM
I think they were extremely lucky.

Anyway, I was thinking about the whole Shane didn't see or hear him discussion while I was out for my chicken curry. It's been a few years since I delved into this case but these are the facts which I will repeat for the benefit of new readers.

Corinne claimed that Luke was home burning the dinner soon after the murder took place but has no way of backing up that claim. Luke's older brother Shane stated that he came home to an empty house and went on the computer to look at porn, keeping an ear for anyone coming in. He was very clear that Luke was not at home.

Luke for his part claimed he went home after hanging about waiting for Jodi. She was supposed to have met him but never turned up. He claims that he went home and started to prepare dinner. He makes no mention of Shane being in the house.

The Mitchell home consisted of a ground floor and an upstairs, it wasn't a big house. If Luke had been at home while Shane was upstairs, wouldn't the latter have heard Luke come in.  Wouldn't he have heard him rattling about downstairs, opening cupboards, cooker door etc?  Wouldn't he have heard him on the phone?

According to Shane none of this happened, he just wasn't in the house.

In my opinion, this very crucial piece of evidence by Luke Mitchell's brother was key to the prosecution's case and could very well have persuaded the jury.

There are a few points here I’m not sure are right, from what I understood, Luke came home from school and started making the dinner, there were calls made to the house and answered showing someone was home, not Shane or his mum so had to be Luke but this was before the murder. Shane came home and went straight upstair onto the computer, did not check if anyone was home. He was very clear he did not know if anyone was home.

Luke claims he made tea, had dinner with his mum, his brother had his upstair maybe? Then left to meet Jodi around 5.30, called her home and was told she had left, waited at the end of his street (confirmed by someone who knew him) then thought she was not coming, for any number of reasons, so went to hang out with his mates.

Thing that always got me was Shane did have dinner that evening, if his mum was at work then who cooked it? That’s why for me his brother really does hold the key. If he really didn’t get the chance to tell the full story on the stand then now is his chance. If on the other hand he does not say anything then that’s does not look good for Luke!
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 27, 2021, 10:27:03 PM
There are a few points here I’m not sure are right, from what I understood, Luke came home from school and started making the dinner, there were calls made to the house and answered showing someone was home, not Shane or his mum so had to be Luke but this was before the murder. Shane came home and went straight upstair onto the computer, did not check if anyone was home. He was very clear he did not know if anyone was home.

Luke claims he made tea, had dinner with his mum, his brother had his upstair maybe? Then left to meet Jodi around 5.30, called her home and was told she had left, waited at the end of his street (confirmed by someone who knew him) then thought she was not coming, for any number of reasons, so went to hang out with his mates.

Thing that always got me was Shane did have dinner that evening, if his mum was at work then who cooked it? That’s why for me his brother really does hold the key. If he really didn’t get the chance to tell the full story on the stand then now is his chance. If on the other hand he does not say anything then that’s does not look good for Luke!

4.55pm Luke phones his mothers work and speaks to his grandmother
5.03pm Luke phones the speaking clock from his mobile

Allegedly Corrine Mitchell arrived home from work at 5.15pm and Luke Mitchell left the house at 5.30pm.

There is also a mystery as to where he was after school. He didn't use the school bus yet walked home. Again none of his fellow students could confirm any of this.  More missing hours?

I suggested to Corrine Mitchell that the defence search out youth witnesses to establish Luke's whereabouts but it never happened, all I ever heard was excuses.  And when she was challenged with facts that didn't back up the story she turned on everyone.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 27, 2021, 10:33:13 PM
If I recall correctly, Corinne Mitchell didn't get home from work until nearly 5.30pm.

There is also a mystery as to where he was after school. He didn't use the school bus yet walked home. Again none of his fellow students could confirm any of this.  More missing hours?

I suggested to Corrine Mitchell that the defence search out witnesses but it never happened.

And wasn’t Luke meant to have left the house at 5.30 or 5.35pm?

What flavour pie did Sandra Lean quote in her book btw - chicken or steak or did she keep it generic  @)(++(*

It was allegedly a pie straight from the freezer too wasn’t it - frozen pie taking longer to cook than unfrozen or fresh

And Corrine hadn’t been shopping had she

How long did Corrine’s prawns take to defrost?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Bullseye on February 27, 2021, 10:37:34 PM
If I recall correctly, Corinne Mitchell didn't get home from work until nearly 5.30pm.

There is also a mystery as to where he was after school. He didn't use the school bus yet walked home. Again none of his fellow students could confirm any of this.  More missing hours?

I suggested to Corrine Mitchell that the defence search out witnesses but it never happened.

I thought phone records confirmed he was home after school? Jodi did not go missing til after 5pm. She and Luke had exchanged txts around 4.30 to meet up after tea.  Luke said he left home at around 5.30. I think the police said they thought he left house at around 4.50. Murder was between 1710 and 1730, 2 boys at the v in the wall at 1715.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on February 27, 2021, 10:42:21 PM
There’s something extremely wrong with your observations

What about the channel 5 show and other news articles

I’m sure she isn’t happy about that either but at least, arguably, they are transparent in their agenda. The Daily Record was simply dishonest. It was click bait with no real thought for Jodi’s family.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 27, 2021, 10:47:54 PM
I’m sure she isn’t happy about that either but at least, arguably, they are transparent in their agenda. The Daily Record was simply dishonest. It was click bait with no real thought for Jodi’s family.
Which part was dishonest?  It seemed wholly sympathetic to Jodi’s family and would surely have been much less distressing to them than the programme on Channel Five.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on February 27, 2021, 10:49:13 PM
4.55pm Luke phones his mothers work and speaks to his grandmother
5.03pm Luke phones the speaking clock from his mobile

Allegedly Corrine Mitchell arrived home from work at 5.15pm and Luke Mitchell left the house at 5.30pm.

There is also a mystery as to where he was after school. He didn't use the school bus yet walked home. Again none of his fellow students could confirm any of this.  More missing hours?

I suggested to Corrine Mitchell that the defence search out youth witnesses to establish Luke's whereabouts but it never happened, all I ever heard was excuses.  And when she was challenged with facts that didn't back up the story she turned on everyone.

If the defence never tried to contact youth witnesses, and by that I take it you mean his fellow students, how can we know if they would have confirmed Luke’s story?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 27, 2021, 11:10:04 PM
4.55pm Luke phones his mothers work and speaks to his grandmother
5.03pm Luke phones the speaking clock from his mobile

Allegedly Corrine Mitchell arrived home from work at 5.15pm and Luke Mitchell left the house at 5.30pm.

There is also a mystery as to where he was after school. He didn't use the school bus yet walked home. Again none of his fellow students could confirm any of this.  More missing hours?

I suggested to Corrine Mitchell that the defence search out youth witnesses to establish Luke's whereabouts but it never happened, all I ever heard was excuses.  And when she was challenged with facts that didn't back up the story she turned on everyone.

What time was Corrine picked up on CCTV?

And what did she buy from the shops - fresh prawns?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 27, 2021, 11:34:58 PM
The Daily Record was simply dishonest.

You’ve clearly fallen for the con

The facts ⬇️

Excerpt from today’s Daily Record by Jane Hamilton

Of course we heard things from various sources and most of us knew early on Mitchell was a suspect.

This was never confirmed by Lothian and Borders Police.

There were no secret briefings about Mitchell to the media.


https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/dignified-silence-jodi-joness-mum-23575874
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on February 27, 2021, 11:45:30 PM
You’ve clearly fallen for the con

The facts ⬇️

Excerpt from today’s Daily Record by Jane Hamilton

Of course we heard things from various sources and most of us knew early on Mitchell was a suspect.

This was never confirmed by Lothian and Borders Police.

There were no secret briefings about Mitchell to the media.


https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/dignified-silence-jodi-joness-mum-23575874

I’m not talking about the content but the agenda. This was a non story used to generate clicks. I’m sure Jodi’s mum’s dignified silence being used in this way would have appalled her.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2021, 12:05:04 AM
I’m not talking about the content but the agenda. This was a non story used to generate clicks. I’m sure Jodi’s mum’s dignified silence being used in this way would have appalled her.
I expect she’s even more appalled by the efforts of your “very good friend” Sandra.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 28, 2021, 12:07:29 AM
I’m not talking about the content but the agenda. This was a non story used to generate clicks. I’m sure Jodi’s mum’s dignified silence being used in this way would have appalled her.

The Scottish press have been consistently pro Jones and anti Mitchell in this case, it will be interesting to see if this Ch5 documentary manages to achieve any change. It's ultimately down to the useless SCCRC however and I don't see that changing any time soon.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Brietta on February 28, 2021, 12:18:17 AM
It’s very serious but neither of them were charged?
Snip

Corinne also defends her son’s alibi that he was at home cooking dinner at the time Jodi was murdered.

However, as the alibi was not held up in court she was arrested for perjury before the charges were dropped.

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/shane-mitchell-what-evidence-did-luke-mitchells-brother-give-and-why-was-it-crucial-to-jodi-jones-murder-trial-3148506
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 28, 2021, 08:06:25 AM
Snip

Corinne also defends her son’s alibi that he was at home cooking dinner at the time Jodi was murdered.

However, as the alibi was not held up in court she was arrested for perjury before the charges were dropped.

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/shane-mitchell-what-evidence-did-luke-mitchells-brother-give-and-why-was-it-crucial-to-jodi-jones-murder-trial-3148506

It followed that if Luke was convicted then his mother lied and committed perjury.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2021, 08:07:37 AM
Snip

Corinne also defends her son’s alibi that he was at home cooking dinner at the time Jodi was murdered.

However, as the alibi was not held up in court she was arrested for perjury before the charges were dropped.

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/crime/shane-mitchell-what-evidence-did-luke-mitchells-brother-give-and-why-was-it-crucial-to-jodi-jones-murder-trial-3148506
strange that the charges were dropped when Mitchell was found guilty...
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Angelo222 on February 28, 2021, 09:46:08 AM
strange that the charges were dropped when Mitchell was found guilty...

They probably decided she had suffered enough.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 28, 2021, 01:38:45 PM
I noticed someone is suggesting Sandra Lean needs to ‘clarify her position’ in relation to the false, malicious and indeed potentially dangerous and libellous accusations being made about [Name removed]

It’s not going to happen

and

Sandra Lean does not care

Plus she’s too busy arranging direct sales of her book




The bigger the lie the harder the truth is to believe’
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 28, 2021, 02:53:29 PM
Truth will always be truth, regardless of lack of understanding, disbelief or ignorance.’ W. Clement Stone
🌻
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 28, 2021, 03:17:18 PM
Once again using any point to attack Sandra.

What is it about my critique of Sandra Lean that appears to push your buttons?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Paranoid Android on February 28, 2021, 03:29:50 PM
I take it Dr Lean is no longer blaming Robert Greens?

Strange - she seemed so convinced at the time.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 28, 2021, 03:33:49 PM
I take it Dr Lean is no longer blaming Robert Greens?

Strange - she seemed so convinced at the time.

Maybe the ‘criminologist’ in her finally kicked in

Not for one moment would I ever give Sandra Lean any credibility
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Paranoid Android on February 28, 2021, 03:39:31 PM
It was MK - no, it was RG - no wait, I've changed my mind again - it was [Name removed].

I just think when you keep changing your claims, it's hard to maintain any credibility, and it can look like you're clutching at straws.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Admin on February 28, 2021, 03:59:46 PM
I understand this board has been locked once already today.

Let's not necessitate a repeat.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 28, 2021, 04:27:44 PM
It was MK - no, it was RG - no wait, I've changed my mind again - it was [Name removed].

I just think when you keep changing your claims, it's hard to maintain any credibility, and it can look like you're clutching at straws.

This from 2012

’Mitchell was jailed in 2005 for the schoolgirl murder which made headlines across the UK.

It is understood the dossier will be put in front of the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission, citing the fact Greens was in the area at the time and the “modus operandi” was similar to his offence.

The report’s author, Sandra Lean, who is helping Mitchell’s defence team, said: “When I realised Greens had apparently been regularly in the vicinity at the time, it sent a shiver through my spine. It’s hard to believe no-one has joined the dots since he became so notorious.”

https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/mitchell-team-links-greens-jodi-killing-897329



Robert Greens is a rapist not a murderer ergo different ‘modus operandi’
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Paranoid Android on February 28, 2021, 04:38:08 PM
I'm sure Dr Lean is genuinely convinced of Mitchell's innocence, but the inconsistency of her claims makes her look like an opportunist.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 28, 2021, 04:42:33 PM
I'm sure Dr Lean is genuinely convinced of Mitchell's innocence

I’m not of the same view
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Paranoid Android on February 28, 2021, 06:53:15 PM
I’m not of the same view

Why do you think she does it?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 28, 2021, 08:00:55 PM
Why do you think she does it?

Because she can
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 28, 2021, 09:41:58 PM
Huge RED FLAG for me Sandra Lean referring to John Lamberton as a ‘malevolent troll’


Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 28, 2021, 09:59:37 PM
Well that was fun  @)(++(*

She never answered a single question and denied that there was a hidden route between the path and the Mitchell street.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on February 28, 2021, 10:01:31 PM
Well that was fun  @)(++(*

She never answered a single question and denied that there was a hidden route between the path and the Mitchell street.

That was sooo bad!  *&^^&

Especially as you’ve been there and know for a fact there is
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on February 28, 2021, 10:46:03 PM
That was sooo bad!  *&^^&

Especially as you’ve been there and know for a fact there is

The same thing happened with the two female witnesses in a car who passed Luke Mitchell standing by the side of the road opposite the end of the footpath. She tried to persuade me that this happened much further along the road but I was able to provide photographic evidence to the contrary.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on February 28, 2021, 11:21:51 PM
The same thing happened with the two female witnesses in a car who passed Luke Mitchell standing by the side of the road opposite the end of the footpath. She tried to persuade me that this happened much further along the road but I was able to provide photographic evidence to the contrary.
what has been your actual involvement in this investigation John?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on February 28, 2021, 11:57:55 PM
The same thing happened with the two female witnesses in a car who passed Luke Mitchell standing by the side of the road opposite the end of the footpath. She tried to persuade me that this happened much further along the road but I was able to provide photographic evidence to the contrary.

Was the place with the two people standing shown in the documentary the right place? Was what they staged similar to what the witness reported seeing?

"Additionally, a witness from the trial complained to Ofcom about remarks made by a contributor in the first part of the documentary, which he claimed suggested he could have been a suspect."

Which remarks, which witness?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 01, 2021, 12:00:17 AM
Was the place with the two people standing shown in the documentary the right place? Was what they staged similar to what the witness reported seeing?

"Additionally, a witness from the trial complained to Ofcom about remarks made by a contributor in the first part of the documentary, which he claimed suggested he could have been a suspect."

Which remarks, which witness?

Am I right in thinking that the woman who allegedly saw Jodi and Luke couldn’t pick Luke out in court?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on March 01, 2021, 12:00:56 AM
Was the place with the two people standing shown in the documentary the right place? Was what they staged similar to what the witness reported seeing?

"Additionally, a witness from the trial complained to Ofcom about remarks made by a contributor in the first part of the documentary, which he claimed suggested he could have been a suspect."

Which remarks, which witness?

What we saw in the Ch5 documentary took place at the other end of the path at Easthouses. It was a reasonable reconstruction.

I can't remember which witness was referred to, I would need to watch it again,
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on March 01, 2021, 12:04:59 AM
Am I right in thinking that the woman who allegedly saw Jodi and Luke couldn’t pick Luke out in court?

Yes but then his appearance had changed in the intervening period.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 01, 2021, 12:06:16 AM
What we saw in the Ch5 documentary took place at the other end of the path at Easthouses. It was a reasonable reconstruction.

I can't remember which witness was referred to, I would need to watch it again,

I believe the witness was Ann Bryson (?), the witness who described Jodi’s clothes wrongly and couldn’t identify Luke in court.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 01, 2021, 12:08:13 AM
Yes but then his appearance had changed in the intervening period.

And Jodi’s clothes?

We’ve all seen the photographs of Luke straight after the murder and at court and apart from the hair length he looks just the same.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on March 01, 2021, 12:09:37 AM
what has been your actual involvement in this investigation John?

A thorough look at the facts, the movements, the terrain, the evidence and the characters involved. I think I've probably forgotten a lot of it now after so many years. I used to debate it in some depth with Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton on the now defunct Wrongly Accused Person forum.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on March 01, 2021, 12:10:53 AM
And Jodi’s clothes?

We’ve all seen the photographs of Luke straight after the murder and at court and apart from the hair length he looks just the same.

I personally don't believe Andrina Bryson saw Luke and Jodi.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on March 01, 2021, 12:14:46 AM
What we saw in the Ch5 documentary took place at the other end of the path at Easthouses. It was a reasonable reconstruction.


If it was the wrong end it doesn't sound that accurate Would the witness have had the same view at the other end?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on March 01, 2021, 12:15:40 AM
I personally don't believe Andrina Bryson saw Luke and Jodi.

Wouldn't the people have come forward by now if Andrina saw them? This is a small town wouldn't they have realised?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on March 01, 2021, 12:22:30 AM
Wouldn't the people have come forward by now if Andrina saw them? This is a small town wouldn't they have realised?

One would think so but the public are generally scared to approach the police. I should know being a former cop.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 01, 2021, 12:25:36 AM
I personally don't believe Andrina Bryson saw Luke and Jodi.

Me neither.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DreadPirateGagarin on March 01, 2021, 12:27:12 AM
If it was the wrong end it doesn't sound that accurate Would the witness have had the same view at the other end?

I could be mistaken but I think the reconstruction was in the right place? Bryson saw them at the Easthouses end, this streetview shows the Easthouses end, matches the doc:

https://www.google.com/maps/@55.8771305,-3.0686397,3a,75y,42.81h,63.86t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s-_BRr3C_qqj7Kkj5qxnBkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on March 01, 2021, 12:35:21 AM
If it was the wrong end it doesn't sound that accurate Would the witness have had the same view at the other end?

No, the other end was several hundred yards away at Newbattle.  To clarify, Andrina Bryson in her car saw a boy and a girl talking at the Easthouses end of the path. Two other women in another car passed feet from Luke Mitchell standing near the other end of the path just down the road from Newbattle
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 01, 2021, 08:45:41 AM
Huge RED FLAG for me Sandra Lean referring to John Lamberton as a ‘malevolent troll’

My mistake - it was Jay Mack (the guy on the right) who called John a ‘malevolent troll‘ - Sandra Lean agreed with him
(Around 47.18)

John’s question was:
‘Another point conveniently missed by Sandra is the route back to the Mitchell home which require walking along the main road
(sic)

Sandra Lean replied:
“This guy will try to discredit everything I say. So Mr Lamberton there is no other route back to Luke’s house that he can get there without walking up the main road because there’s only one point of entry to the house and that’s the front door - back gardens all back onto each other so he cannae get in the back door without coming through somebody else’s house”

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: William Wallace on March 01, 2021, 10:05:57 AM
Wouldn't the people have come forward by now if Andrina saw them? This is a small town wouldn't they have realised?

It's logical and reasonable to assume that if these 2 people were NOT connected to the murder they would have been traced. Andrina Bryson saw 2 people at the path whilst driving past, but as there was no reason to pay much attention she would only have had a fleeting glimpse, which will be why she could not identify LM in Court. I would suggest that the 2 people she saw were Jodi Jones and the person who killed her who has never been traced. It wasn't Luke M because it would be completely IMPOSSIBLE for none of his DNA to be found at the murder scene or in his house despite 3 forensic searches. Therefore, the explanation for the 2 people at the path apparently not being traced is because one of them is deceased and the other disappeared when the Police focussed only on LM and failed to consider who else the male could have been.   LM has been clearly  "fitted up" to avoid the Police having an ongoing "maniac on the loose scenario".
                                                     

One of the key pieces of evidence against LM was the statements of the search party who said in Court that LM went straight to the V in the wall, implying he knew where the body was already. However those statements had been changed from the one's they gave at the time of the murder which all said that LM's dog alerted them near the V in the wall. The Jury were never told that the statements had been changed because the law in Scotland allows for the original statements not to be mentioned if they have been altered at a later date. Not only were the statements all changed, they were all changed to say the same thing......that LM went straight to the V in the wall. The chances of 3 people's recall being changed to end up saying the exact same thing are virtually nil.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 01, 2021, 10:21:08 AM
Strange that this "local maniac on the looose" didn't go on to murder others in such a grisly way.  Wonder what made him start and finish with Jodi Jones?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: William Wallace on March 01, 2021, 10:28:54 AM
Strange that this "local maniac on the looose" didn't go on to murder others in such a grisly way.  Wonder what made him start and finish with Jodi Jones?

I would suggest the reason for that is because the killer was not a Peter Tobin/Angus Sinclair type killer who preyed on complete strangers. It is also very unlikely that a deranged psychopath would decide to hide in the woods in broad daylight in a place where there are cyclists and walkers and attack someone randomly. He was someone known to Jodi who wanted to kill her and only her.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 01, 2021, 10:41:29 AM
I would suggest the reason for that is because the killer was not a Peter Tobin/Angus Sinclair type killer who preyed on complete strangers. It is also very unlikely that a deranged psychopath would decide to hide in the woods in broad daylight in a place where there are cyclists and walkers and attack someone randomly. He was someone known to Jodi who wanted to kill her and only her.
And what would be the motivation for that?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: William Wallace on March 01, 2021, 10:52:18 AM
The reasons for it are impossible to speculate on as only LM has been thoroughly investigated by the Police and only LM has been constantly discussed in the Press and other public domains for 17 years. Not much is publicly known about the backgrounds of other possible suspects.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 01, 2021, 10:59:00 AM
The reasons for it are impossible to speculate on as only LM has been thoroughly investigated by the Police and only LM has been constantly discussed in the Press and other public domains for 17 years. Not much is publicly known about the backgrounds of other possible suspects.

I have read that there was several people in Jodi’s orbit with an interest in knives/drug use/violent outbursts.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Venturi Swirl on March 01, 2021, 11:16:04 AM
I have read that there was several people in Jodi’s orbit with an interest in knives/drug use/violent outbursts.
Including Luke Mitchell who was her boyfriend at the time.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: debs229 on March 01, 2021, 12:09:05 PM
i’ve also read an article from the scotsman way back in 2004 which states there was also an uncle on the path one of moped boys GD father DD??
iv not saw his name anywhere before now, is this the uncle who was present during witness interviews in the granny’s and [Name removed] in days after
sounds to me he’s been making sure all stick to the story,
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on March 01, 2021, 12:14:01 PM
All members posting on this thread are reminded to comply with the forum rules. This is a sensitive subject and comments must reflect that fact.

Please keep posts constructive and informative. Please have respect for the victim and her family.

Posts which do not adhere to these guidelines will be removed and the member suspended. 
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: William Wallace on March 01, 2021, 12:20:59 PM
I have read that there was several people in Jodi’s orbit with an interest in knives/drug use/violent outbursts.

That is definitely correct. It also applies to Mark Kane who was not known to Jodi and was never investigated despite Police being told he had scratches all over his face the day after the murder. It took Police years to contact him, because he had moved away and they didn't bother pursuing him at the time.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 01, 2021, 12:25:18 PM
That is definitely correct. It also applies to Mark Kane who was not known to Jodi and was never investigated despite Police being told he had scratches all over his face the day after the murder. It took Police years to contact him, because he had moved away and they didn't bother pursuing him at the time.

Mark Kane was ‘dismissed’ from the police inquiry for a reason
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: William Wallace on March 01, 2021, 03:13:12 PM
Mark Kane was ‘dismissed’ from the police inquiry for a reason

What reason? Why was he not traced at the time?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 01, 2021, 06:02:20 PM
What reason? Why was he not traced at the time?

I don’t buy into Sandra Leans nonsense of him not being traced at the time

Show me he wasn’t traced

And explain to me how he was able to commit the murder in the state he was in that night and not leave a trace of himself at the CS
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 01, 2021, 06:04:09 PM
I don’t buy into Sandra Leans nonsense of him not being traced at the time

Show me he wasn’t traced

You said that he was dismissed for a reason. What reason?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Admin on March 01, 2021, 07:37:01 PM
Well that was fun  @)(++(*

She never answered a single question and denied that there was a hidden route between the path and the Mitchell street.

Out of curiosity I had a squint at Google Earth today and tho and behold there is even a path marked between the points mentioned.

Is this the route Luke Mitchell took to get home after killing his girlfriend? A route which completely avoids the main road.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 01, 2021, 08:05:22 PM
Well that was fun  @)(++(*

She never answered a single question and denied that there was a hidden route between the path and the Mitchell street.

Out of curiosity I had a squint at Google Earth today and tho and behold there is even a path marked between the points mentioned.

So why does Sandra Lean want to continuously deflect her followers from this alternative path ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Admin on March 01, 2021, 08:18:54 PM
So why does Sandra Lean want to continuously deflect her followers from this alternative path ?

We don't know because she won't answer questions.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 01, 2021, 08:42:23 PM
I notice she’s still presenting the ‘double bind dilemma’ to her followers

‘Do buy from Amazon’ - ‘no buy from me’ (As seen on TV profile pic)  *&^^&





Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Bullseye on March 01, 2021, 09:21:50 PM
What I took from her answer on the other path was there was no way to get into the back of the house you can only enter through the front so he would need to, at some point on his journey, walk down the street in full view of all the houses, his neighbours etc before he can enter his house.  There is another route that takes you off the roads but it does look like he would need to walk along his street to get to his house? I’ve not been in the street so can’t be sure if there are house but looking at the google image it does look that way? But I agree Sandra could have been clearer on a few of her answers   
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 01, 2021, 09:32:05 PM
What I took from her answer on the other path was there was no way to get into the back of the house you can only enter through the front so he would need to, at some point on his journey, walk down the street in full view of all the houses, his neighbours etc before he can enter his house.  There is another route that takes you off the roads but it does look like he would need to walk along his street to get to his house? I’ve not been in the street so can’t be sure if there are house but looking at the google image it does look that way? But I agree Sandra could have been clearer on a few of her answers

To be fair I don’t think a youtube Q and A of this type is the best medium for questions that require an in-depth answer. The type of interview carried out by James English is a much better vehicle for this.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Bullseye on March 01, 2021, 09:45:27 PM
To be fair I don’t think a youtube Q and A of this type is the best medium for questions that require an in-depth answer. The type of interview carried out by James English is a much better vehicle for this.

Agreed
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: William Wallace on March 01, 2021, 11:23:05 PM
You said that he was dismissed for a reason. What reason?

He hasn't answered that because he doesn't have an answer.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: WakeyWakey on March 02, 2021, 01:26:32 AM
He hasn't answered that because he doesn't have an answer.

the appeal court heard it in 2008 and yet it never made it the final appeal - why? because luke lawyers couldnt bring enough supporting evidence?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Angelo222 on March 02, 2021, 10:26:23 AM
The attempts to incriminate the late Mark Kane in this murder are deplorable but predictable. I can think of several men who have been openly accused of killing Jodi Jones by those who still defend Luke Mitchell.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 02, 2021, 12:01:01 PM
The attempts to incriminate the late Mark Kane in this murder are deplorable but predictable. I can think of several men who have been openly accused of killing Jodi Jones by those who still defend Luke Mitchell.

That doesn’t mean Luke isn’t innocent.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 06, 2021, 05:34:42 PM
Luke Mitchell stated in one of his police statements re what Jodi was wearing,

She liked that top, she like, she bought some of her own stuff, I mean, the clothes, the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night. I think they were borrowed off her sister.”

How would Luke know what Jodi was wearing that night unless he’d seen her?

On what date did Mitchell tell the police the above ?

Sandra Lean made claim,

Exactly - within 48 hours, borrowed t-shirts had become a real thing
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 14, 2021, 11:20:05 AM
The attempts to incriminate the late Mark Kane in this murder are deplorable but predictable. I can think of several men who have been openly accused of killing Jodi Jones by those who still defend Luke Mitchell.

Sandra Lean - 24th Oct 2015
I have never shared this picture because I believe it is morally wrong to do so. Talking about the connection of Kane to the case in respect of his undermining other witnesses is one thing, plastering his face all over the internet is another entirely. To have used images of him could have caused exactly the same prejudice as was raised against Luke because of media images, and that was something I was not prepared to risk, especially as I have repeatedly said I am not accusing him of any wrongdoing.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg333188.html#msg33318

Yet okay to be ‘plastered’ on a channel 5 TV show?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 14, 2021, 03:35:42 PM
Sandra Lean - 24th Oct 2015
I have never shared this picture because I believe it is morally wrong to do so. Talking about the connection of Kane to the case in respect of his undermining other witnesses is one thing, plastering his face all over the internet is another entirely. To have used images of him could have caused exactly the same prejudice as was raised against Luke because of media images, and that was something I was not prepared to risk, especially as I have repeatedly said I am not accusing him of any wrongdoing.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg333188.html#msg33318

Yet okay to be ‘plastered’ on a channel 5 TV show?

Is it worth pointing out that that wouldn’t have been Sandra’s fault?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: DanniCash on March 14, 2021, 06:12:45 PM
Does any evidence for this "confession" exist outside Sandra and Corinne's claims?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 14, 2021, 06:14:23 PM
From an old timeline

10.39pm Judy sends a text to Lukes phone, Right Toad, say goodnight toLuke. Thats you grounded for another week.
10.40pm Luke phones Judy to say he hasnt seen Jodi all night. Judy says she will call round Jodis friends. Luke returns to the house and tells his mother what Judy has said.
10.49pm Judy calls back to say Jodi is nowhere to be found, and she is calling the police. Luke says he will go up the path to look for Jodi, and if he doesnt find her, he will make his way to Judys house to decide what to do next. (This story was later changed to claim that Luke had agreed to meet the other members of the search party at the path.)

What time did Luke take Mia out for her last walk to ‘save his mums legs’ ?

At approx 6:00 here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t6ysPeri0O4

Corrine: His curfew is ten same as hers and it must have been around about nine ish something like that and he arrived home and I’m like gosh your early he went has Jodi not been and I went no he says has she phoned I went no oh I wonder where the hell she is I went Luke she’s a young girl she’ll be in somebody’s house yipping and completely forgot I said boyfriends come way down the line when it comes to wee girls talking Erm uh I so then he got a phone call from Jodi’s mother he got a text right toad get up the road you’re ground because this time it was past her curfew so he phoned her and said she’s not here she sis what do you mean she’s not here she never came down

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 14, 2021, 06:28:58 PM
What time did Luke take Mia out for her last walk to ‘save his mums legs’ ?

At approx 6:00 here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t6ysPeri0O4

Corrine: His curfew is ten same as hers and it must have been around about nine ish something like that and he arrived home and I’m like gosh your early he went has Jodi not been and I went no he says has she phoned I went no oh I wonder where the hell she is I went Luke she’s a young girl she’ll be in somebody’s house yipping and completely forgot I said boyfriends come way down the line when it comes to wee girls talking Erm uh I so then he got a phone call from Jodi’s mother he got a text right toad get up the road you’re ground because this time it was past her curfew so he phoned her and said she’s not here she sis what do you mean she’s not here she never came down

Again you point evades me.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 14, 2021, 06:31:52 PM
Again you point evades me.

What time did Luke take Mia out for her last walk to ‘save his mums legs’ ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 14, 2021, 06:33:06 PM
Where was Luke when he got the text message from Judi at 10.39pm?

Was he in the house or out the house and baring in mind his curfew was allegedly 10.00pm

From an old timeline

10.39pm Judy sends a text to Lukes phone, Right Toad, say goodnight toLuke. Thats you grounded for another week.
10.40pm Luke phones Judy to say he hasnt seen Jodi all night. Judy says she will call round Jodis friends. Luke returns to the house and tells his mother what Judy has said.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 14, 2021, 06:39:15 PM
Where was Luke when he got the text message from Judi at 10.39pm?

Was he in the house or out the house and baring in mind his curfew was allegedly 10.00pm

A timeline from where?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 14, 2021, 06:47:21 PM
A timeline from where?

Several times now Corrine has alluded to Luke having been ‘out the house’ when he received JuJ 10.39pm text message - if he was ‘out the house’ where was he when he received the text?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 14, 2021, 07:04:30 PM
What time did Luke take Mia out for her last walk to ‘save his mums legs’ ?

At approx 6:00 here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=t6ysPeri0O4

Corrine: His curfew is ten same as hers and it must have been around about nine ish something like that and he arrived home and I’m like gosh your early he went has Jodi not been and I went no he says has she phoned I went no oh I wonder where the hell she is I went Luke she’s a young girl she’ll be in somebody’s house yipping and completely forgot I said boyfriends come way down the line when it comes to wee girls talking Erm uh I so then he got a phone call from Jodi’s mother he got a text right toad get up the road you’re ground because this time it was past her curfew so he phoned her and said she’s not here she sis what do you mean she’s not here she never came down

According to the CoA judgement it states at para 29:

After spending some time at the Abbey, the appellant went home, arriving between 2105 to 2110. He watched a video until he received the text from the deceased's mother at 2241.

What do Luke Mitchell’s witness statements say with regards where he was when he received the text message from JuJ?

And what time did he tell police he took Mia out for a walk?

Or have Luke and Corrines stories changed since he was found guilty and convicted?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 14, 2021, 07:18:10 PM
At para 148 of the CoA judgement it states,

That latter passage is of some importance in the context of the present case in which it was argued on behalf of the appellant that the whole of the interview in question after page 12 of the transcript should have been excluded from the jury's consideration

What did Luke Mitchell say to police during his interviews which he attempted to have ‘excluded’ ?

What incriminating evidence do the transcripts contain after page 12?

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 19, 2021, 04:11:15 PM
I should know being a former cop.

And very possibly the ‘cop’ referred to by Corrine Mitchell in her interview with James English regarding the ‘confession’
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 19, 2021, 04:14:10 PM
Wouldn't the people have come forward by now if Andrina saw them? This is a small town wouldn't they have realised?

One would think so but the public are generally scared to approach the police

Do you have a cite for this John ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: John on March 20, 2021, 11:32:21 AM
All posters are reminded to keep comments amicable and to the point. Information provided to support debate should be accompanied by a link where possible. Please abide by the rules which have been developed for everyone's benefit. TY
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 28, 2021, 10:37:08 AM
According to the CoA judgement it states at para 29:

After spending some time at the Abbey, the appellant went home, arriving between 2105 to 2110. He watched a video until he received the text from the deceased's mother at 2241.

What do Luke Mitchell’s witness statements say with regards where he was when he received the text message from JuJ?

And what time did he tell police he took Mia out for a walk?

Or have Luke and Corrines stories changed since he was found guilty and convicted?

Asked whether he had seemed anxious, she said: “Not at that point, no.” She said he then went up to his bedroom before taking the dog for a walk.
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/jodi-boyfriend-was-cooking-dinner-xpv2b0l6xn8

So it appears Luke Mitchell was out walking Mia the dog at around 10.41pm

Did Mitchell tell police he had a torch with him when he allegedly took Mia out before making another trip out to search for Jodi?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Mr Apples on March 30, 2021, 04:51:19 AM
So it appears Luke Mitchell was out walking Mia the dog at around 10.41pm

Did Mitchell tell police he had a torch with him when he allegedly took Mia out before making another trip out to search for Jodi?

According to Corinne’s interview with JE, Luke didn’t have a torch with him at that particular time. I think after he received the text and spoke to JudJ @ 2241, he went back to the house and told CM about the situation and indicated he was going to go out and look for Jodi no matter what. Corinne said that she was worried about him going out as it was late (Corinne supposedly said: ‘Not at this time of night you’re not, young man!’ when Luke said he was going out to look for her), but Luke was insistent that he was going and Corinne then advised him to take Mia, which he did, and then Luke borrowed a torch from Shane and went on his way to Easthouses, via the path, with Mia.

Corinne mentioned that Luke had only been outside for a couple of minutes when he came back in from Mia’s last walk (CM had asked Luke to take Mia out for her last walk/pee of the day to ‘save her legs’, and during this last walk was when he got the text from Judj @ 2241). So, Luke was probably outside that night at 2235-2245 and then back out again at 2250-2300 (which may have explained neighbours’ sightings of him at 2200; perhaps the neighbours got their times mixed up; maybe those same neighbours mistook Luke going home earlier that evening at back of 9 that evening as the 2200 sighting). 
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 30, 2021, 10:23:58 PM
Corinne mentioned that Luke had only been outside for a couple of minutes when he came back in from Mia’s last walk (CM had asked Luke to take Mia out for her last walk/pee of the day to ‘save her legs’, and during this last walk was when he got the text from Judj @ 2241). So, Luke was probably outside that night at 2235-2245 and then back out again at 2250-2300 (which may have explained neighbours’ sightings of him at 2200; perhaps the neighbours got their times mixed up; maybe those same neighbours mistook Luke going home earlier that evening at back of 9 that evening as the 2200 sighting).

Mr Frankland claimed to have seen Mitchell at 22:00hrs when he ‘settled down to watch television’

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 30, 2021, 10:27:49 PM
Corinne mentioned that Luke had only been outside for a couple of minutes when he came back in from Mia’s last walk (CM had asked Luke to take Mia out for her last walk/pee of the day to ‘save her legs’, and during this last walk was when he got the text from Judj @ 2241). So, Luke was probably outside that night at 2235-2245 and then back out again at 2250-2300 (which may have explained neighbours’ sightings of him at 2200; perhaps the neighbours got their times mixed up; maybe those same neighbours mistook Luke going home earlier that evening at back of 9 that evening as the 2200 sighting).

But his curfew was 10pm?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 30, 2021, 10:28:56 PM
Corinne said that she was worried about him going out as it was late (Corinne supposedly said: ‘Not at this time of night you’re not, young man!’ when Luke said he was going out to look for her)

Corinne mentioned that Luke had only been outside for a couple of minutes when he came back in from Mia’s last walk (CM had asked Luke to take Mia out for her last walk/pee of the day to ‘save her legs’, and during this last walk was when he got the text from Judj @ 2241). So, Luke was probably outside that night at 2235-2245 and then back out again at 2250-2300

If Corrine was worried about Luke going out because it was late why didn’t she or Shane go with him?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 30, 2021, 11:17:13 PM
If Corrine was worried about Luke going out because it was late why didn’t she or Shane go with him?

A better question would be that if Jodi had left home around 5, as JuJ said in her first statements, and was ‘mucking about up here’ ie in Easthouses why, when Luke called JuJ’s landline at 5.40 to ask where Jodi was, didn’t alarm bells ring? Did they think she had merely met some friends and got sidetracked, as Corrine suggested ? Why was it thought suspicious that Luke hadn’t been overly worried when Jodi didn’t turn up when her family didn’t seem especially worried either, JuJ only texting Luke’s phone after Jodi’s curfew time had passed? Why no other calls to Luke during that evening to make sure he had met Jodi?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 30, 2021, 11:25:07 PM
My question was ⬇️

If Corrine was worried about Luke going out because it was late why didn’t she or Shane go with him?

Luke Mitchell was a 14 year old child - ‘a wee laddie’  - why didn’t an adult ie: Corrine or Shane accompany him?

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 30, 2021, 11:29:18 PM
A better question would be that if Jodi had left home around 5, as JuJ said in her first statements, and was ‘mucking about up here’ ie in Easthouses why, when Luke called JuJ’s landline at 5.40 to ask where Jodi was, didn’t alarm bells ring?

Was it because Luke didn’t phone them back?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 30, 2021, 11:31:29 PM
A better question would be that if Jodi had left home around 5, as JuJ said in her first statements, and was ‘mucking about up here’ ie in Easthouses why, when Luke called JuJ’s landline at 5.40 to ask where Jodi was, didn’t alarm bells ring? Did they think she had merely met some friends and got sidetracked, as Corrine suggested ?

JuJ 10.41 text to Luke suggests she thought her daughter was with him
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 30, 2021, 11:34:28 PM
Why was it thought suspicious that Luke hadn’t been overly worried when Jodi didn’t turn up when her family didn’t seem especially worried either, JuJ only texting Luke’s phone after Jodi’s curfew time had passed? Why no other calls to Luke during that evening to make sure he had met Jodi?

When did AO tell JuJ Luke had phoned looking for Jodi?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 30, 2021, 11:44:16 PM
Why no other calls to Luke during that evening to make sure he had met Jodi?

Again - JuJ 10.41 text to Luke suggests she thought her daughter was with him
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 30, 2021, 11:51:55 PM
Corinne mentioned that Luke had only been outside for a couple of minutes when he came back in from Mia’s last walk (CM had asked Luke to take Mia out for her last walk/pee of the day to ‘save her legs’, and during this last walk was when he got the text from Judj @ 2241). So, Luke was probably outside that night at 2235-2245 and then back out again at 2250-2300


If Luke did take Mia out to ‘save his mums legs’ at 2235-2245 - where did he take her?

And why was Corrine getting her 14 year child to walk her dog so late at that time of night on his own?

And why didn’t she ask Shane?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: William Wallace on March 30, 2021, 11:55:13 PM
Sandra Lean misleading again with the words and actions of ‘hacking off’ their hair the day after the murder  *&^^&

What’s unusual about a boy (or girl) cutting their thick curly hair shorter during the summer months - I view this as nothing more than a coincidence

Don’t most households have a pair of clippers in their bathrooms?

Some of your posts are quite sensible. This one is stand-up comedy I'm afraid. A coincidence he cut all his hair off (so badly he then had to go to a barber), obviously not experienced at doing it then. He does that. the day after the murder and you think it's coincidence? @)(++(*
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 30, 2021, 11:58:31 PM
Was it because Luke didn’t phone them back?

By the time Luke contacted JuJ Jodi had left the house at least forty minutes before. As far as JuJ was concerned Jodi and Luke we’re staying in Easthouses so 40-50 minutes was an excessive amount of time for her still not to be with him. Why didn’t she call Luke again to see that Jodi had turned up? As a mother surely it would be the natural thing to do?

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 30, 2021, 11:59:40 PM
Some of your posts are quite sensible. This one is stand-up comedy I'm afraid. A coincidence he cut all his hair off (so badly he then had to go to a barber), obviously not experienced at doing it then. He does that. the day after the murder and you think it's coincidence? @)(++(*

 @)(++(*
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: William Wallace on March 31, 2021, 12:00:33 AM
You’d have thought John Sallens and Michael Neill would have explored this - why didn’t they?

Why wasn’t a reconstruction done showing that it was possible for Luke Mitchell to have washed his hands and face - for example - in a nearby stream/river before heading home and changing his clothes and going back out to get dirt under his nails?

And why did the documentary keep referring to the murder as a ‘bloodbath’? Didn’t the forensics say there were only droplets of blood found?
Are you losing the plot? He commits murder at 515pm takes a route back to wash in a river, then goes back out to get dirt under his nails??? Excuse me but his HAIR was found to be greasy and unwashed too. He did all this before being seen back in Newbattle before 6pm? Lol
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 31, 2021, 12:02:26 AM
JuJ 10.41 text to Luke suggests she thought her daughter was with him

Thought? Shouldn’t she have checked?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 12:03:22 AM
Quote
He does that. the day after the murder and you think it's coincidence?

On what day/date did he go to the barbers

Surely if he had something to hide he wouldn’t have booked into a barbers shop?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 12:04:53 AM
By the time Luke contacted JuJ Jodi had left the house at least forty minutes before. As far as JuJ was concerned Jodi and Luke we’re staying in Easthouses so 40-50 minutes was an excessive amount of time for her still not to be with him. Why didn’t she call Luke again to see that Jodi had turned up? As a mother surely it would be the natural thing to do?

Luke spoke to AO not JuJ

When was JuJ made aware Luke had phoned the house?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 12:06:20 AM
Are you losing the plot?

Is there a plot to lose?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 12:07:37 AM
Excuse me but his HAIR was found to be greasy and unwashed too. He did all this before being seen back in Newbattle before 6pm? Lol

Can you talk me through the forensic testing carried out on Luke Mitchell’s hair
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 31, 2021, 12:10:49 AM
Are you losing the plot? He commits murder at 515pm takes a route back to wash in a river, then goes back out to get dirt under his nails??? Excuse me but his HAIR was found to be greasy and unwashed too. He did all this before being seen back in Newbattle before 6pm? Lol

But according to LF sighting Luke’s hair was wet or had gel in, so obviously he washed his hair and re-dirtied that too
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 12:14:49 AM
Thought? Shouldn’t she have checked?

When did AO tell JuJ Luke had phoned?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 31, 2021, 12:15:20 AM
Luke spoke to AO not JuJ

When was JuJ made aware Luke had phoned the house?

Luke used the landline. I assume JuJ would have heard the phone ring. Of course as a de facto father you would have thought AO would be worried too.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 12:20:32 AM
Luke used the landline. I assume JuJ would have heard the phone ring.

What if we assume JuJ didn’t hear the phone. What did AO say to JuJ about Luke’s phone call ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 12:28:41 AM
Luke used the landline. I assume JuJ would have heard the phone ring. Of course as a de facto father you would have thought AO would be worried too.

Maybe it didn’t dawn on AO at this time of day Jodi was by now missing
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 12:40:30 AM
Luke used the landline. I assume JuJ would have heard the phone ring. Of course as a de facto father you would have thought AO would be worried too.

And did AO know what Jodi’s plans were that evening
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 12:44:10 AM
Luke used the landline. I assume JuJ would have heard the phone ring. Of course as a de facto father you would have thought AO would be worried too.

The question should be why did Luke tell his friend Jodi wasn’t coming out that evening?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 01:14:12 AM
John Sallens and Michael Neill

Didn’t one or both of these men refer to the crime scene as a ‘bloodbath’

Sandra Lean
Using the word "bloodstained" maybe gives the wrong impression - the branches all had spots or drips of blood on them - they weren't covered with blood’

‘The area where Jodi was found (and her body itself) were remarkably clean of blood, which seems very unusua
l

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451974.html#msg451974
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 01:22:36 AM
Didn’t one or both of these men refer to the crime scene as a ‘bloodbath’

Sandra Lean
Using the word "bloodstained" maybe gives the wrong impression - the branches all had spots or drips of blood on them - they weren't covered with blood’

‘The area where Jodi was found (and her body itself) were remarkably clean of blood, which seems very unusua
l’
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451974.html#msg451974

Was blood ever found on Luke Mitchell’s footwear - from having climbed over the wall - when he was with the search party?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Mr Apples on March 31, 2021, 01:26:59 AM
Mr Frankland claimed to have seen Mitchell at 22:00hrs when he ‘settled down to watch television’

Do you have a link to what MF said? Haven’t read about him before on other websites that discuss this case. I don’t doubt he said that, but he could’ve been mistaken for 2100 (when LM walked home for the evening after hanging with his friends at the Newbattle end) or 2230-2245 (when LM was taking Mia out for her last pee of the night as per ‘saving CM’s legs’). We can all only speculate, which is all the more difficult given we haven’t got the case files in front of us.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 01:31:10 AM
Do you have a link to what MF said? Haven’t read about him before on other websites that discuss this case.

The 10pm sighting of Luke Mitchell by his neighbour is referred to in the CoA judgment
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 01:34:43 AM
or 2230-2245 (when LM was taking Mia out for her last pee of the night as per ‘saving CM’s legs’). We can all only speculate, which is all the more difficult given we haven’t got the case files in front of us.

Do Luke Mitchell’s police statements say he took Mia out for a walk on his own late at night - past his curfew time - because Corrine needed to ‘save her legs’?

And do Corrine and Shane’s statements support this?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 01:38:03 AM
When did AO tell JuJ Luke had phoned?

The CoA states at para 11,

“Ovens informed Judith Jones about this call” but doesn’t give a time of when he did so
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Mr Apples on March 31, 2021, 01:58:59 AM
But his curfew was 10pm?

I think it’s safe to assume that as it was Mia’s last walk/pee of the night, CM assumed LM wouldn’t be venturing far from the house with the dog. As regards CM or SM not going with Luke, again, we can only speculate. CM was likely tired (hence why she’d asked Luke to save her legs earlier) and I suspect SM either couldn’t be bothered, wasn’t in or didn’t have the greatest relationship with his brother (I think SM is about 8 or 9 years older than Luke). Also, bear in mind that it was slap bang in the middle of summer, so, even though it was late, there would still have been some light when he set off to look for Jodi; he also had the dog, a torch andcInthink CM knew he was going to meet up with members of Jodi’s family, anyway.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 02:00:12 AM
Do you have a link to what MF said? Haven’t read about him before on other websites that discuss this case. I don’t doubt he said that, but he could’ve been mistaken for 2100 (when LM walked home for the evening after hanging with his friends at the Newbattle end) or 2230-2245 (when LM was taking Mia out for her last pee of the night as per ‘saving CM’s legs’). We can all only speculate, which is all the more difficult given we haven’t got the case files in front of us.

Nicholas Frankland “had been busy doing DIY” - therefore unlikely he saw Luke at around 9pm from his window walking past

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 02:03:50 AM
I think it’s safe to assume that as it was Mia’s last walk/pee of the night, CM assumed LM wouldn’t be venturing far from the house with the dog. As regards CM or SM not going with Luke, again, we can only speculate. CM was likely tired (hence why she’d asked Luke to save her legs earlier) and I suspect SM either couldn’t be bothered, wasn’t in or didn’t have the greatest relationship with his brother (I think SM is about 8 or 9 years older than Luke). Also, bear in mind that it was slap bang in the middle of summer, so, even though it was late, there would still have been some light when he set off to look for Jodi; he also had the dog, a torch andcInthink CM knew he was going to meet up with members of Jodi’s family, anyway.

If Mia needed a pee couldn’t Corrine have let her go for one in the back garden?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 02:06:44 AM
According to Corinne’s interview with JE, Luke didn’t have a torch with him at that particular time. I think after he received the text and spoke to JudJ @ 2241, he went back to the house and told CM about the situation and indicated he was going to go out and look for Jodi no matter what. Corinne said that she was worried about him going out as it was late (Corinne supposedly said: ‘Not at this time of night you’re not, young man!’ when Luke said he was going out to look for her), but Luke was insistent that he was going and Corinne then advised him to take Mia, which he did, and then Luke borrowed a torch from Shane and went on his way to Easthouses, via the path, with Mia.

Corinne mentioned that Luke had only been outside for a couple of minutes when he came back in from Mia’s last walk (CM had asked Luke to take Mia out for her last walk/pee of the day to ‘save her legs’, and during this last walk was when he got the text from Judj @ 2241). So, Luke was probably outside that night at 2235-2245 and then back out again at 2250-2300 (which may have explained neighbours’ sightings of him at 2200; perhaps the neighbours got their times mixed up; maybe those same neighbours mistook Luke going home earlier that evening at back of 9 that evening as the 2200 sighting).

And if Luke was outside at ‘2235-2245’ what was he doing where was he going when he was seen walking past the Frankland house at 2200?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Mr Apples on March 31, 2021, 02:06:49 AM
Do Luke Mitchell’s police statements say he took Mia out for a walk on his own late at night - past his curfew time - because Corrine needed to ‘save her legs’?

And do Corrine and Shane’s statements support this?

Don’t know. As I said, we can only speculate, and this is even more difficult without the case files at our disposal. I haven’t read Sandra Lean’s book, either . . . perhaps that clarifies it, with her being one of the very few people on the planet to have been given access to the case files.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 02:12:18 AM
Was blood ever found on Luke Mitchell’s footwear - from having climbed over the wall - when he was with the search party?

Sandra Lean
The problem with the V point is how many people had been through it by the time the forensics officers got there. For example, blood on a boulder at the path side of the V was considered incapable of providing any usable evidence because it could have been deposited there by police officers at the scene. The explanation for no trace of Jodi going through the V was the same, but it's odd that there was no trace of the wall on Jodi either. I've been through the V point many times and every time, I get "scuff marks" of some description on my jeans.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451974.html#msg451974

Luke was taken straight to the police station from the crime scene - so why wasn’t blood found on his footwear?

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Parky41 on March 31, 2021, 02:12:35 AM
By the time Luke contacted JuJ Jodi had left the house at least forty minutes before. As far as JuJ was concerned Jodi and Luke we’re staying in Easthouses so 40-50 minutes was an excessive amount of time for her still not to be with him. Why didn’t she call Luke again to see that Jodi had turned up? As a mother surely it would be the natural thing to do?


Mr Ovens statements "I told Luke, Jodi had already left to meet him"

Common sense yet again. This is an ordinary evening, his daughter had left a short while ago to meet with her boyfriend. The boyfriend phones and is told she had already left to meet him. It's early evening in summertime. The family go about their evening, probably not given this a second thought, why would they? There is no phone call back, natural assumption that the pair had met. They couldn't phone Jodi to let her know Luke had phoned as Jodi did not have a phone.

Another area of suspicion upon Luke, whilst it is feasible that a teenager may delete her personal message to her boyfriend, having used her mothers phone, why would Luke have completely deleted everything from his? Not so feasible? Who was Luke worried about that may read them?

It gets to this girls curfew time, It appears JuJ gives her daughter some leeway here, gets to over half an hour of being late and she is annoyed at her daughter, first day of all her punishments being lifted and she stays out later than she should. She texted Luke's phone "Right Toad get home, you're grounded"

As soon as this mother realises her daughter has not been with Luke - she is frantic. How do we know this, as by 10.50pm she is phoning the police. This speaks volumes to me. It shows clearly that this girl was not in the habit of not being or doing what she had set out to do - on this occasion it was to meet with Luke.

We have Luke, who tells his friend that "Jodi is not coming out" Who told this girls mother that he thought "she had grounded her again"  Who claimed himself that he was waiting around for nearly two hours on her turning up? Who knew she was not supposed to use this path alone, and even if he did think she was walking this path alone, he did nothing. By his account, she did not turn up, she was to be walking this path. He did not phone back to see where she was.

Yet again, clear, precise reasons as to why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated from the investigation.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 02:22:34 AM

Mr Ovens statements "I told Luke, Jodi had already left to meet him"

Common sense yet again. This is an ordinary evening, his daughter had left a short while ago to meet with her boyfriend. The boyfriend phones and is told she had already left to meet him. It's early evening in summertime. The family go about their evening, probably not given this a second thought, why would they? There is no phone call back, natural assumption that the pair had met. They couldn't phone Jodi to let her know Luke had phoned as Jodi did not have a phone.

Another area of suspicion upon Luke, whilst it is feasible that a teenager may delete her personal message to her boyfriend, having used her mothers phone, why would Luke have completely deleted everything from his? Not so feasible? Who was Luke worried about that may read them?

It gets to this girls curfew time, It appears JuJ gives her daughter some leeway here, gets to over half an hour of being late and she is annoyed at her daughter, first day of all her punishments being lifted and she stays out later than she should. She texted Luke's phone "Right Toad get home, you're grounded"

As soon as this mother realises her daughter has not been with Luke - she is frantic. How do we know this, as by 10.50pm she is phoning the police. This speaks volumes to me. It shows clearly that this girl was not in the habit of not being or doing what she had set out to do - on this occasion it was to meet with Luke.

We have Luke, who tells his friend that "Jodi is not coming out" Who told this girls mother that he thought "she had grounded her again" Who claimed himself that he was waiting around for nearly two hours on her turning up? Who knew she was not supposed to use this path alone, and even if he did think she was walking this path alone, he did nothing. By his account, she did not turn up, she was to be walking this path. He did not phone back to see where she was.

Yet again, clear, precise reasons as to why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated from the investigation.

Luke slipped up (Again) when he said to JuJ he thought she’d been grounded - especially after AO had told him a few hours before Jodi had left the house

I wonder if Corrine called him an ‘idiot’ for slipping up like this? like when she said to James English he’d have to be an idiot to turn right
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Mr Apples on March 31, 2021, 02:23:22 AM
If Mia needed a pee couldn’t Corrine have let her go for one in the back garden?

I’ve asked myself the same question. However, maybe it was more of a last walk, rather than last pee. Don’t know who was responsible for taking the dog for walks and what the family’s normal routine was as regards dog walking, but bear in mind the schools had finished up for the summer holidays on 30.06.03, so it was lighter nights and Luke’s schedule had probably changed and had more free rein to do as he pleased (he already was a bit of the man about the house, given his parents split up when he was 11 and CM already had let him do as he pleased more than most teenagers would). Perhaps Sandra Lean’s book goes into more detail about these particular issues.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Parky41 on March 31, 2021, 02:25:46 AM
Sandra Lean
The problem with the V point is how many people had been through it by the time the forensics officers got there. For example, blood on a boulder at the path side of the V was considered incapable of providing any usable evidence because it could have been deposited there by police officers at the scene. The explanation for no trace of Jodi going through the V was the same, but it's odd that there was no trace of the wall on Jodi either. I've been through the V point many times and every time, I get "scuff marks" of some description on my jeans.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451974.html#msg451974

Luke was taken straight to the police station from the crime scene - so why wasn’t blood found on his footwear?

"but it's odd that there was no trace of the wall on Jodi either"


Firstly - shows clearly perhaps that Jodi entered the woodland with Luke via their usual hangout place, that she most certainly did not go over this V.  Remember here that LM denied ever frequenting this woodland. Until the tree was produced as evidence with their initials carved into it (with a sharp blade) Then denied having ever ventured further into it -  Along of course with denying that he had not known of the existence of this V at all, until that evening? - really? You can not miss it.

Secondly - the blunt force trauma to this girls head, Whilst getting hit with a heavy branch of a tree may not leave residue, a dry stone dyke is something else, chalk etc. Ms Leans futile claims of the trauma being caused by the wall?

And not forgetting the bloody spray - "once again we are left with the real possibility that Jodi was murdered elsewhere" - ???

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 02:32:27 AM
"but it's odd that there was no trace of the wall on Jodi either"


Firstly - shows clearly perhaps that Jodi entered the woodland with Luke via their usual hangout place, that she most certainly did not go over this V.  Remember here that LM denied ever frequenting this woodland. Until the tree was produces as evidence with their initials carved into it (with a sharp blade) The denied having ever ventured further into it - think we something with bells on here? Along of course with denying that he had known of the existence of this V at all, until that evening? - really? You can not miss it.

Secondly - the blunt force trauma to, Whilst getting hit with a heavy branch of a tree may not leave residue, a dry stone dyke is something else, chalk etc. Ms Leans futile claims of the trauma being caused by the wall?

And not forgetting the bloody spray - "once again we are left with the real possibility that Jodi was murdered elsewhere" - ???

Photo of Luke Mitchell’s wood carving here ⬇️
https://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/mitchell-luke-photos.htm
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 02:36:16 AM
If Corrine didn’t want Luke ‘negotiating stairs whilst he was on heavy medication’ how did the numerous bottles of urine end up in his bedroom?

Corrine Mitchell
Luke was on very very strong medication because obviously he was totally traumatised by this time the press were vile the police were vile and in our living room we had two big couches I mean really big couches so I’m like right you sleep on that one I’ll sleep on that one I didn’t want him negotiating stairs under heavy medication because he would have tumbled back down and I wanted to keep an eye on him 
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 03:05:15 AM

Mr Ovens statements "I told Luke, Jodi had already left to meet him"

Common sense yet again. This is an ordinary evening, his daughter had left a short while ago to meet with her boyfriend. The boyfriend phones and is told she had already left to meet him. It's early evening in summertime. The family go about their evening, probably not given this a second thought, why would they? There is no phone call back, natural assumption that the pair had met. They couldn't phone Jodi to let her know Luke had phoned as Jodi did not have a phone.

Another area of suspicion upon Luke, whilst it is feasible that a teenager may delete her personal message to her boyfriend, having used her mothers phone, why would Luke have completely deleted everything from his? Not so feasible? Who was Luke worried about that may read them?

It gets to this girls curfew time, It appears JuJ gives her daughter some leeway here, gets to over half an hour of being late and she is annoyed at her daughter, first day of all her punishments being lifted and she stays out later than she should. She texted Luke's phone "Right Toad get home, you're grounded"

As soon as this mother realises her daughter has not been with Luke - she is frantic. How do we know this, as by 10.50pm she is phoning the police. This speaks volumes to me. It shows clearly that this girl was not in the habit of not being or doing what she had set out to do - on this occasion it was to meet with Luke.

We have Luke, who tells his friend that "Jodi is not coming out" Who told this girls mother that he thought "she had grounded her again"  Who claimed himself that he was waiting around for nearly two hours on her turning up? Who knew she was not supposed to use this path alone, and even if he did think she was walking this path alone, he did nothing. By his account, she did not turn up, she was to be walking this path. He did not phone back to see where she was.

Yet again, clear, precise reasons as to why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated from the investigation.

And why did Luke apparently phone his mum to see if Jodi had been to their house but not phone JuJ or AO back?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Mr Apples on March 31, 2021, 03:11:54 AM

Mr Ovens statements "I told Luke, Jodi had already left to meet him"

Common sense yet again. This is an ordinary evening, his daughter had left a short while ago to meet with her boyfriend. The boyfriend phones and is told she had already left to meet him. It's early evening in summertime. The family go about their evening, probably not given this a second thought, why would they? There is no phone call back, natural assumption that the pair had met. They couldn't phone Jodi to let her know Luke had phoned as Jodi did not have a phone.

Another area of suspicion upon Luke, whilst it is feasible that a teenager may delete her personal message to her boyfriend, having used her mothers phone, why would Luke have completely deleted everything from his? Not so feasible? Who was Luke worried about that may read them?

It gets to this girls curfew time, It appears JuJ gives her daughter some leeway here, gets to over half an hour of being late and she is annoyed at her daughter, first day of all her punishments being lifted and she stays out later than she should. She texted Luke's phone "Right Toad get home, you're grounded"

As soon as this mother realises her daughter has not been with Luke - she is frantic. How do we know this, as by 10.50pm she is phoning the police. This speaks volumes to me. It shows clearly that this girl was not in the habit of not being or doing what she had set out to do - on this occasion it was to meet with Luke.

We have Luke, who tells his friend that "Jodi is not coming out" Who told this girls mother that he thought "she had grounded her again"  Who claimed himself that he was waiting around for nearly two hours on her turning up? Who knew she was not supposed to use this path alone, and even if he did think she was walking this path alone, he did nothing. By his account, she did not turn up, she was to be walking this path. He did not phone back to see where she was.

Yet again, clear, precise reasons as to why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated from the investigation.

Yes, no doubt . And when you consider that Luke’s own brother couldn’t give him an alibi for his whereabouts between 1640 and 1745, then it becomes even more incrimnating (especially as he said in his initial statement on 03.07.03 that he didn’t think he saw Luke in the house @ 1640 when he got home, but changed it on 07.07.03 to say he did see Luke; it’s interesting to note that he changed it after consulting with his mum, CM, who gave a statement on 06.07.03). However, incriminating as all that may be, it can all equally be explained away by theory to counter any of these arguments (we know the counter-arguments; I don’t have the time to list them all!). Shane’s testimony is a real stumbling block for me. It’s been suggested that the FLO tried to put words into his mouth and would never believe anything he said. Likewise, when the police interviewed him they often interviewed him forcefully, much in the same manner as Luke was. I think Shane had some memory loss issues which were the result of drug abuse (was the extent of his memory loss ever questioned? was Sm even a reliable witness? I guess the the fact that he was working full time as a car mechanic at the time suggests he was).
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Mr Apples on March 31, 2021, 03:35:10 AM
Couple of questions:

When was that carving on the tree found? Was it done after Jodi was murdered? Can it be proven that it was done prior to the murder?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 31, 2021, 09:42:25 AM
The CoA states at para 11,

“Ovens informed Judith Jones about this call” but doesn’t give a time of when he did so

From the context it appears she was told soon after.

‘ [11] The appellant telephoned the deceased's house at 1732, but received no reply. At 1740 he called again, and spoke to Alan Ovens, asking if the deceased was in. He was informed that she had left to meet him. He replied, "OK, cool". Ovens informed Judith Jones about this call’

So both AO and JuJ knew that Jodi wasn’t with Luke 40-50 minutes after she had left the house yet it didn’t raise alarm bells with them and they didn’t phone Luke again to check that she had got there.

Why was it thought suspicious that Luke, a young boy, failed to chase up what had happened to Jodi when her parents, the adults, didn't?

Double standards?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 10:55:33 AM
Yes, no doubt . And when you consider that Luke’s own brother couldn’t give him an alibi for his whereabouts between 1640 and 1745, then it becomes even more incrimnating (especially as he said in his initial statement on 03.07.03 that he didn’t think he saw Luke in the house @ 1640 when he got home, but changed it on 07.07.03 to say he did see Luke; it’s interesting to note that he changed it after consulting with his mum, CM, who gave a statement on 06.07.03). However, incriminating as all that may be, it can all equally be explained away by theory to counter any of these arguments (we know the counter-arguments; I don’t have the time to list them all!). Shane’s testimony is a real stumbling block for me. It’s been suggested that the FLO tried to put words into his mouth and would never believe anything he said. Likewise, when the police interviewed him they often interviewed him forcefully, much in the same manner as Luke was. I think Shane had some memory loss issues which were the result of drug abuse (was the extent of his memory loss ever questioned? was Sm even a reliable witness? I guess the the fact that he was working full time as a car mechanic at the time suggests he was).

Shane appears to have attempted to use alleged ‘memory loss issues’ as a result of ‘drug abuse’ but he may have abused drugs following the murder?
Do we have more details on Shane’s history of ‘drug abuse’ - of the types of drugs he was abusing and when?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 11:05:04 AM
Couple of questions:

When was that carving on the tree found? Was it done after Jodi was murdered? Can it be proven that it was done prior to the murder?

Wasn’t the photo of the tree carving a trial exhibit ?

Photo of Luke Mitchell’s wood carving here ⬇️
https://murderpedia.org/male.M/m/mitchell-luke-photos.htm

The jury of eight men and seven women are shown photographs taken on and around the Roan's Dyke pathway in Dalkeith, where Jodi's body was discovered.
Among the pictures is one of a tree with the initials 'LM' carved above the initials '[Name removed]'
.

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/THE+JODI+JONES+TRIAL%3A+A+silent+witness.-a0124614173


On Thursday, the jury was shown a series of photographs taken in the Roan's Dyke area.
They included a picture of a tree which had the initials LM and [Name removed] carved into the bark
.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4003009.stm
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Parky41 on March 31, 2021, 12:03:59 PM
From the context it appears she was told soon after.

‘ [11] The appellant telephoned the deceased's house at 1732, but received no reply. At 1740 he called again, and spoke to Alan Ovens, asking if the deceased was in. He was informed that she had left to meet him. He replied, "OK, cool". Ovens informed Judith Jones about this call’

So both AO and JuJ knew that Jodi wasn’t with Luke 40-50 minutes after she had left the house yet it didn’t raise alarm bells with them and they didn’t phone Luke again to check that she had got there.

Why was it thought suspicious that Luke, a young boy, failed to chase up what had happened to Jodi when her parents, the adults, didn't?

Double standards?


"double standards"

The same as neither party chose to phone the other?  That great divide between the two. Two sides.

Let's think about that in more detail. JuJ was under the impression that her daughter would be meeting with Luke, somewhere "up here"  She didn't know where but certainly appeared not to have been in the belief that her daughter would be walking to Luke's on her own, down a path which her mother did not approve of her using on her own, thus had told her not to? - that a fair assumption?

Now that missing detail - much like AB's, giving an approximation of when she had arrived home, basing this on receiving a phone call from he husband "about half an hour after" Which actually turned out to be a longer period of time than half an hour - didn't it? as they started from the beginning, using those till and ATM receipts. She hadn't kept check of 'real' time - these were approximations.

Now AO and JuJ, what were they doing in that time frame between Jodi leaving and this phone call? Were they busy, had they lost track of time, more so why would they be keeping a check on the time?  However, as above they give the same 'type' of information. Jodi had left, shortly after her leaving Luke phoned, I told him that "Jodi had already left to meet with her". They don't know the time of Luke's phone call however, they did not check, that is obvious as they did not stop and think 'oh wait a minute that was over half an hr ago, did they? But again, when these timings around phone calls are checked (by the shoddy police work) it turns out to be a longer period of time. However it is clear they are not concerned, why would they be as it is evident by their actions of not phoning Luke that they believe the couple had met. That they simply were not aware of how much time had passed?

On the other hand however, we have a boy who was very much aware of the time he had claimed to have been out of the house,  he tells of the rough time of leaving (around 5.30pm) and of the time he had phoned his friends to meet up in the Abbey. We know he is aware of the time as he phones them back "chasing them up" It is such an such a time, "where are you?" - concern that his friends hadn't arrived on time? He phoned them back, didn't he.

So this boy, who claims (knows by his account) that his girlfriend will be using this path alone, she does not turn up, specifically makes the point that he had not walked further than 'Barondale cottage' Just idles away for nearly two hours and thinks "she is not coming out" "I thought you had grounded her again"

A search is organised, it is known and believed at this point that the couple had not met. Luke tells JuJ he had not seen her all evening, that she failed to turn up at his.

"at his" - Luke then offers to search the path.

Clear reason yet again - why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 31, 2021, 02:53:20 PM

"double standards"

The same as neither party chose to phone the other?  That great divide between the two. Two sides.

Let's think about that in more detail. JuJ was under the impression that her daughter would be meeting with Luke, somewhere "up here"  She didn't know where but certainly appeared not to have been in the belief that her daughter would be walking to Luke's on her own, down a path which her mother did not approve of her using on her own, thus had told her not to? - that a fair assumption?

Now that missing detail - much like AB's, giving an approximation of when she had arrived home, basing this on receiving a phone call from he husband "about half an hour after" Which actually turned out to be a longer period of time than half an hour - didn't it? as they started from the beginning, using those till and ATM receipts. She hadn't kept check of 'real' time - these were approximations.

Now AO and JuJ, what were they doing in that time frame between Jodi leaving and this phone call? Were they busy, had they lost track of time, more so why would they be keeping a check on the time?  However, as above they give the same 'type' of information. Jodi had left, shortly after her leaving Luke phoned, I told him that "Jodi had already left to meet with her". They don't know the time of Luke's phone call however, they did not check, that is obvious as they did not stop and think 'oh wait a minute that was over half an hr ago, did they? But again, when these timings around phone calls are checked (by the shoddy police work) it turns out to be a longer period of time. However it is clear they are not concerned, why would they be as it is evident by their actions of not phoning Luke that they believe the couple had met. That they simply were not aware of how much time had passed?

On the other hand however, we have a boy who was very much aware of the time he had claimed to have been out of the house,  he tells of the rough time of leaving (around 5.30pm) and of the time he had phoned his friends to meet up in the Abbey. We know he is aware of the time as he phones them back "chasing them up" It is such an such a time, "where are you?" - concern that his friends hadn't arrived on time? He phoned them back, didn't he.

So this boy, who claims (knows by his account) that his girlfriend will be using this path alone, she does not turn up, specifically makes the point that he had not walked further than 'Barondale cottage' Just idles away for nearly two hours and thinks "she is not coming out" "I thought you had grounded her again"

A search is organised, it is known and believed at this point that the couple had not met. Luke tells JuJ he had not seen her all evening, that she failed to turn up at his.

"at his" - Luke then offers to search the path.

Clear reason yet again - why suspicion fell upon LM, why he could not be eliminated.

Do you ever provide sources or just hope that members will believe you?

Bottom line...JuJ knew from Luke’s phone call that Jodi hadn’t turned up to meet him up to 50 minutes after she had left the house. She was not supposed to be going to Newbattle according to JuJ but staying in Easthouses. As a mother, and an adult, all sorts of alarm bells should have started ringing, yet she did not check up on her daughter until after 10.30.

Luke was a child and probably thought, as his mum said, that she had met some friends. If Jodi had had a phone he no doubt would have called her to ask where she was. There was no point calling her home again as he knew that she wasn’t there.

Not sure what you think is suspicious about Luke saying ‘at his’? Explain please?

Of course in the first media reports on the 1st of July it was claimed that Jodi left her home at 5.30. That would certainly explain why JuJ wasn’t particularly worried when Luke called a few minutes later. Of course that would have thrown out of the window 5.15 as the time of the murder and with it Luke’s guilt.

Something to think about.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Parky41 on March 31, 2021, 03:50:30 PM
Quote
It's not difficult to see why the police were instantly suspicious of Luke.

In Judith's first statement, she told police Luke had told her he was "coming up the path on his bike" and that statement wasn't corrected until almost a month later when Judith told police she'd made a mistake - Luke hadn't said that at all, he'd said he was coming up the path "with his dog."

Why instantly suspicious of Luke though? This statement was given afterwards, along with statements from the others.

Quote
One police officer noted, after taking the missing person details, that Jodi had left her home at tea time "with her boyfriend."

.
Both officers on the ground and the 999 operator were of the impression that Luke, and Luke alone, was (a) out looking for Jodi and (b) somewhere behind Newbattle High School on a path.

"one police officer" what did the other police officer note? Two officers in attendance at JuJ's house while Luke was on the path?  The search trio only heading out. Luke had spoken with JuJ at 10.59pm at the beginning of his search of the path. Fair to assume she informs the police of this, therefore at this point he is searching alone.

Quote
Then the officers on the ground get a shout - the boyfriend's found a body.

Even the conclusion that "the boyfriend's found a body" was wrong (in terms of the information being passed to them from control.) Luke told the operator they'd found something - she told the officers on the ground, "He won't say what." It was Kelly who dialled 999 a few minutes later and screamed down the phone, "It's a f*cking body."
But the operator(s) appeared to think the calls they were receiving were from the same person - Luke. The operator who took Kelly's call reported he found the caller's attitude odd - he wasn't reacting the way he'd have expected someone who'd just found a body to act - he seemed more annoyed that the police were taking so long to get there.


Couple of things here: Where is this confusion that there was 'only Luke?' from the operators? when the call clearly states - "they" however, from the moment the police arrive they are aware that there are four people, within no time at all they are aware that these 4 had been together at some point searching once statements were taken. 

What I really want to pick up on here is the actual part of what the operator said "the laddies in a right state" used when Ms Lean makes an attempt to show that Luke was not emotionless. Luke was calm and collective in his call, it was SK who was extremely distressed he was the "laddie in a right state" The defence attempted to use this at trial, until the actual recordings were played clearly showing it was the call from SK and not LM who was "in a right state."

Also remembering here the evidence of the emergency services whom attended at the scene, of LM's demeanor?

Certainly, however there are areas here, as to why suspicion fell upon LM, from this moment it became increasingly difficult to eliminate him

Quote
If they'd received the call "the search party have found a body," might they have been suspicious about Kelly's comment, "I suppose you've been to my house first?" If they'd been told Jodi was supposed to be hanging out in Easthouses/Mayfield and the family search trio were leaving from Mayfield to look for her, might they have thought it odd that they didn't look for her in Easthouses/Mayfield but headed straight for the path? Might they have thought it strange that, although there were four searchers out in two different areas, they were given only one contact number, for the lone searcher coming from Newbattle, and no contact details for the three searchers coming from Mayfield?

Covered this in another post - LM had told JuJ that Jodi had failed to turn up. She had not arrived at his. That he was searching the path. The search party were heading to meet up to search. LM was still on this path. That time frame - reported missing at 10.50pm found around 11.30pm She had failed to meet with Luke, the connecting area is the path however we know that the prompt for searching this path, came from LM. The search trio barely had time to draw breath before being led onto Roansdyke path?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 05:09:31 PM
Do you ever provide sources or just hope that members will believe you?

Bottom line...JuJ knew from Luke’s phone call that Jodi hadn’t turned up to meet him up to 50 minutes after she had left the house. She was not supposed to be going to Newbattle according to JuJ but staying in Easthouses. As a mother, and an adult, all sorts of alarm bells should have started ringing, yet she did not check up on her daughter until after 10.30.

How many sociopathic 14 year old murderers had JuJ met before Luke Mitchell?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 05:11:31 PM
Luke was a child and probably thought, as his mum said, that she had met some friends.

He told police Jodi ‘dumped’ him - is this why he finally chose to murder her on that day do you think ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 05:22:02 PM
Why instantly suspicious of Luke though? This statement was given afterwards, along with statements from the others.

"one police officer" what did the other police officer note? Two officers in attendance at JuJ's house while Luke was on the path?  The search trio only heading out. Luke had spoken with JuJ at 10.59pm at the beginning of his search of the path. Fair to assume she informs the police of this, therefore at this point he is searching alone.

Agreed

Does Sandra Lean highlight this in her book?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 05:27:26 PM

What I really want to pick up on here is the actual part of what the operator said "the laddies in a right state" used when Ms Lean makes an attempt to show that Luke was not emotionless. Luke was calm and collective in his call, it was SK who was extremely distressed he was the "laddie in a right state" The defence attempted to use this at trial, until the actual recordings were played clearly showing it was the call from SK and not LM who was "in a right state."


Does Sandra Lean point this out in her book?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 05:59:28 PM
Luke was calm and collective in his call, it was SK who was extremely distressed he was the "laddie in a right state" The defence attempted to use this at trial, until the actual recordings were played clearly showing it was the call from SK and not LM who was "in a right state."

Excerpt from Sandra Lean’s book ‘No Smoke’ page 98

(The police operator who took Luke’s call asking police to come quickly noted, “the laddies in a right state”)
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Mr Apples on March 31, 2021, 06:38:42 PM
What I really want to pick up on here is the actual part of what the operator said "the laddies in a right state" used when Ms Lean makes an attempt to show that Luke was not emotionless. Luke was calm and collective in his call, it was SK who was extremely distressed he was the "laddie in a right state" The defence attempted to use this at trial, until the actual recordings were played clearly showing it was the call from SK and not LM who was "in a right state”.

Interesting. Up until now, I was under the impression that it was Luke who was emotional during the calls to emergency services and SK wasn’t (SL said in an interview that Luke screamed when he first saw the body and that Janine Jones could tell from Luke’s voice when he said he’d found something that something was wrong and she feared the worst). Parky41, do you have a link to this info? What is your source?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 31, 2021, 07:06:35 PM
He told police Jodi ‘dumped’ him - is this why he finally chose to murder her on that day do you think ?

Do you have a cite?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Mr Apples on March 31, 2021, 07:09:19 PM
He told police Jodi ‘dumped’ him

Really? What is your source? Do you have a link?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 31, 2021, 07:51:07 PM
Why instantly suspicious of Luke though? This statement was given afterwards, along with statements from the others.

"one police officer" what did the other police officer note? Two officers in attendance at JuJ's house while Luke was on the path?  The search trio only heading out. Luke had spoken with JuJ at 10.59pm at the beginning of his search of the path. Fair to assume she informs the police of this, therefore at this point he is searching alone.

Yes fair to assume but if you’re going to quote SL please try and be less selective. SL’s point was that suspicion  fell on Luke early because the police had been provided three pieces of false information that formed their view a) that Luke was the only one searching b) that he was on his bike c) and most importantly, that Luke had left home earlier in the evening with Jodi but was now saying that he hadn’t seen her.


Couple of things here: Where is this confusion that there was 'only Luke?' from the operators? when the call clearly states - "they" however, from the moment the police arrive they are aware that there are four people, within no time at all they are aware that these 4 had been together at some point searching once statements were taken. 

What I really want to pick up on here is the actual part of what the operator said "the laddies in a right state" used when Ms Lean makes an attempt to show that Luke was not emotionless. Luke was calm and collective in his call, it was SK who was extremely distressed he was the "laddie in a right state" The defence attempted to use this at trial, until the actual recordings were played clearly showing it was the call from SK and not LM who was "in a right state."

Do you have a cite? JaJ said in a statement that everyone was in hysterics.

Also remembering here the evidence of the emergency services whom attended at the scene, of LM's demeanor?

What did the emergency services say about Luke’s demeanour?

Certainly, however there are areas here, as to why suspicion fell upon LM, from this moment it became increasingly difficult to eliminate him

Covered this in another post - LM had told JuJ that Jodi had failed to turn up. She had not arrived at his. That he was searching the path. The search party were heading to meet up to search. LM was still on this path. That time frame - reported missing at 10.50pm found around 11.30pm She had failed to meet with Luke, the connecting area is the path however we know that the prompt for searching this path, came from LM. The search trio barely had time to draw breath before being led onto Roansdyke path?

Not true. It was Alice who suggested they look back up the path Luke had just come down.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 08:21:42 PM
Do you have a cite? JaJ said in a statement that everyone was in hysterics.

JaJ didn’t adopt this

What did she say once the initial & overwhelming shock wore off?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on March 31, 2021, 09:40:35 PM
JaJ didn’t adopt this

What did she say once the initial & overwhelming shock wore off?

There’s several things JaJ didn’t ‘adopt’ from her first statements. Studies tell us though that first statements are almost always the most accurate.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on March 31, 2021, 10:31:03 PM
There’s several things JaJ didn’t ‘adopt’ from her first statements. Studies tell us though that first statements are almost always the most accurate.

How did shock, distress and trauma effect JaJ first statement ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on April 01, 2021, 12:13:00 AM
"once again we are left with the real possibility that Jodi was murdered elsewhere" - ???

Maybe Sandra Lean will explain to her followers why no large areas of blood staining or ‘pooling’ appear to have been found anywhere other than where the tent was eventually erected
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on April 01, 2021, 12:10:59 PM
How did shock, distress and trauma effect JaJ first statement ?

I notice you make no such accommodation for Luke.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on April 27, 2021, 09:26:33 PM
I also find it interesting how Sandra Lean is suggesting the following here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452099.html#msg452099

I was thinking about the claimed 20 pieces of solid evidence against Luke (that's been deleted now) - what's always interested me are the number of pieces of "evidence" that applied equally, and in some cases, moreso, to others than they did to Luke - so, drug use, connection with knives, "dark" interests, etc, etc. There are at least 5 others to whom all of these apply. Of those five, we can add serious mental health conditions (which didn't apply to Luke), previous attacks on women (which didn't apply to Luke), attacks with bladed intruments (which didn't apply to Luke), long histories of violence and/or involvement with the police (which didn't apply to Luke)
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg452099.html#msg452099

Dark interests” would suggest to me she has finally conceded Luke Mitchell’s interests in satanism aren’t/weren’t normal per se.

Having serious mental health conditions does not automatically suggest that person culpable of murder or indeed a danger to others.

Luke Mitchell didn’t have convictions for previous attacks on women girls but there were plenty of allegations of such

What does Luke’s fathers police witness statement say on these?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: mrswah on April 27, 2021, 10:05:03 PM
Luke Mitchell didn’t have convictions for previous attacks on women girls but there were plenty of allegations of such

What does Luke’s fathers police witness statement say on these?

Plenty of allegations? ??
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on April 28, 2021, 08:10:35 AM
Wasn’t the photo of the tree carving a trial exhibit ?

The jury of eight men and seven women are shown photographs taken on and around the Roan's Dyke pathway in Dalkeith, where Jodi's body was discovered.
Among the pictures is one of a tree with the initials 'LM' carved above the initials '[Name removed]'
.

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/THE+JODI+JONES+TRIAL%3A+A+silent+witness.-a0124614173


On Thursday, the jury was shown a series of photographs taken in the Roan's Dyke area.
They included a picture of a tree which had the initials LM and [Name removed] carved into the bark
.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4003009.stm

Para 162 CoA Judgement
‘As the trial judge informs us, the appellant told the police at interview on 4 July 2003 that he and Jodi would sit on the other side of the wall from the Roan's Dyke Path near to the gap in the wall at the junction of the two paths and "have a cigarette or whatever". In the same interview he said that there was "a tiny wee path ... that folk walk along in the inside of that wall", i.e. on the other side from the Roan's Dyke Path. There was evidence, indeed, that just inside a gap in the wall at the junction of the paths stood a small tree with the initials [Name removed] and LM carved in its bark. A witness David Stirling described an occasion in early June 2003 when he was with friends and they met the appellant at the junction of the paths. They went down the inside of the wall (towards the "V") for some distance, then sat and smoked cannabis. Another witness, John [Name removed], said that on two occasions when the appellant telephoned asking for quantities of cannabis, they arranged to meet at the opening in the wall at the junction of the paths. On one of these occasions when they met the appellant said that he was waiting for Jodi.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on April 28, 2021, 08:46:05 AM
Plenty of allegations? ??

Thread http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=506.msg14694#msg14694
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on April 28, 2021, 10:00:33 AM
Para 162 CoA Judgement
‘As the trial judge informs us, the appellant told the police at interview on 4 July 2003 that he and Jodi would sit on the other side of the wall from the Roan's Dyke Path near to the gap in the wall at the junction of the two paths and "have a cigarette or whatever". In the same interview he said that there was "a tiny wee path ... that folk walk along in the inside of that wall", i.e. on the other side from the Roan's Dyke Path. There was evidence, indeed, that just inside a gap in the wall at the junction of the paths stood a small tree with the initials [Name removed] and LM carved in its bark. A witness David Stirling described an occasion in early June 2003 when he was with friends and they met the appellant at the junction of the paths. They went down the inside of the wall (towards the "V") for some distance, then sat and smoked cannabis. Another witness, John [Name removed], said that on two occasions when the appellant telephoned asking for quantities of cannabis, they arranged to meet at the opening in the wall at the junction of the paths. On one of these occasions when they met the appellant said that he was waiting for Jodi.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

Would that ‘other’ witness be [Name removed]?

Interesting that he admitted that he was selling drugs yet faced no charges.

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 09, 2021, 12:15:15 AM
"but it's odd that there was no trace of the wall on Jodi either"


Firstly - shows clearly perhaps that Jodi entered the woodland with Luke via their usual hangout place, that she most certainly did not go over this V.  Remember here that LM denied ever frequenting this woodland. Until the tree was produced as evidence with their initials carved into it (with a sharp blade) Then denied having ever ventured further into it -  Along of course with denying that he had not known of the existence of this V at all, until that evening? - really? You can not miss it.

Secondly - the blunt force trauma to this girls head, Whilst getting hit with a heavy branch of a tree may not leave residue, a dry stone dyke is something else, chalk etc. Ms Leans futile claims of the trauma being caused by the wall?

And not forgetting the bloody spray - "once again we are left with the real possibility that Jodi was murdered elsewhere" - ???

Angeline aka Sandra Lean

Although the evidence seems to suggest that Jodi was killed behind the wall (blood spray on the wall), this does not rule out the possibility that she was held somewhere before she was killed, or even that she went somewhere voluntarily.

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/shirleymckie/luke-mitchell-postings-now-archived-see-new-thread-t398-s140.html
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 16, 2021, 01:09:41 PM
Angeline aka Sandra Lean

Although the evidence seems to suggest that Jodi was killed behind the wall (blood spray on the wall), this does not rule out the possibility that she was held somewhere before she was killed, or even that she went somewhere voluntarily.

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/shirleymckie/luke-mitchell-postings-now-archived-see-new-thread-t398-s140.html

Angeline - Feb 2010

‘the Scots are supposedly renowned for their hospitality and friendship I cannot believe any of our number would be so ill-mannered as to create an issue over the spelling of whiskey/whisky/scotch/bourbon/sourmash/pure pot still etc. On behalf of Scots, Irish, and whiskey lovers everywhere , please forgive us that rudeness.

I am aware that the Scots are considered dour the world over, but believe me, our sense of humour, when tickled, results in the legendary guffaw which I personally indulged in in  response to a couple of your posts.

Please, whatever serious issues arise from your posts here, maintain that humour otherwise, we dour Scots may become so parochially navel gazing that we may disappear up our own nether regions and, for the umpteenth time in history, leave ourselves with no international voice.

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Parky41 on May 16, 2021, 03:39:41 PM
Will post some of Jigsawman later: That lie? blatant of having no other user names out with Angeline, Sandra L and so forth.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: faithlilly on May 16, 2021, 04:02:41 PM
Will post some of Jigsawman later: That lie? blatant of having no other user names out with Angeline, Sandra L and so forth.

Dr Lean used other user names.

Oops have I spoiled the surprise?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 16, 2021, 05:11:26 PM
Angeline - Nov 25, 2009#57

‘I know, but the thing I've grappled with for years is why?

If you look at the acrobatics they had to perform to construct the case against Luke, or any of the others, for that matter, it has to have been much more difficult than actually carrying out a proper investigation?

In Simon Hall's case, for example, the police instructed a gastro-enterologist to ascertain time of death. When his report didn't fit with the chosen "window of opportunity," they dropped this expert, and his evidence went into the unused evidence file. The police then went to ludicrous lengths to "find" evidence that supported their chosen window of opportunity, at the same time as ignoring several other witnesses/pieces of evidence which backed up the gastro-enterologist's findings.

The police were so sure in Luke's case that the DNA reports would nail Luke. When they didn't, instead of checking further to see whose DNA they did have, they turned somersaults to "find" other evidence to "support" their theory that Luke was the murderer.

Once again, I'm back to why? Is it really the case that, once they have decided on their chosen suspect, they are completely incapable of changing direction, even in the face of concrete evidence that they have got it wrong?

More to the point, do they really believe that the evidence they did have pointing to other people won't re-surface in the future? Time and again, we see it come back to bite them on the backside, but by then lives have been ruined, and the oppportunity to catch the real perpetrator lost.

Can you imagine running any other business or organisation like that?

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/shirleymckie/luke-mitchell-postings-now-archived-see-new-thread-t398-s50.html

 *&^^&
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 16, 2021, 05:17:03 PM
Angeline - Feb 05, 2010#75

’Foolsgold and Reg, Ive been away for a bit, so Ill respond to your posts from Feb 1st in order (sorry for the delay):

Male number two was identified 3 years after the murder, but inexplicably dropped as a suspect, even though his story was demonstrably dishonest.

Male number one, as far as I know, was not a convicted sex offender he was a drug addict, and had psychological issues, but no convictions for sex offences, unless I have missed this somewhere.

Reporters in Scotland are expressly forbidden to speak with prisoners, or to publish anything told to them by prisoners. The rules in England are different.

Lukes pride was dented he thought hed been stood up (remember, he was just 14). He knew he would see Jodi in school the following day, so went off with his friends to pass the evening.

Jodi regularly used the path alone, and with people other than Luke. There is an opening in the wall which is some yards from the entrance which opens onto the road this opening was a meeting place for many of the group which both Jodi and Luke were associated with and Jodi and the others would enter from the road unescorted to meet the others at the gap.

The urinating in bottles only began after Jodi died. It was considered to be a form of OCD brought about by the shock of loss (holding on to everything for fear of losing something important.)

Leonard Kelly and Stephen Kelly are not related, so far as I have been able to ascertain.

Jodis body bore extensive defence injuries she put up one hell of a fight, so it is pretty unlikely that she left no traces on her attacker. Her cousins [Name removed] and [Name removed] (the two on the moped) had a gang hut just meters from where Jodis body was found, from where they would deal cannabis. [Name removed] supplied Jodi, Luke, and several others with cannabis.

We cant be sure it was a crime of opportunity, because the story about being ungrounded that afternoon is not correct. She had been grounded in May. On the Saturday just 2 days before she was murdered, she was out until after 10pm, getting a taxi home from Newbattle at 5 past 10. So two days before she was apparently ungrounded, she was already ungrounded. Also, there is no way of knowing if she called/texted anyone after Luke at 4.38, or even if, in fact, it was Jodi who texted at all the texts came from her mothers phone, but had been deleted immediately after sending. If, for example, she had texted someone saying Im going to Lukes but need to pick up some hash on the way, then that would shed a whole new light on things, and could explain why the texts were deleted in the first place.

There was nothing recovered from the wall, or from Jodis clothing/shoes to suggest that she had gone over the wall at any of the V points it is far more likely that she started walking behind the wall, at the opening at the start of the wall which I refer to above. And yes, almost certainly with someone she trusted. If the text timings are correct, then that person almost certainly could not have been Luke there is not enough time between the sending of the 4.38 text, and the sighting by Andrina Bryson.

It is, in fact, far more likely to have been a more than one person attack, for various reasons, some of which, unfortunately, I am unable to post. One of the guys on the moped lived in a house whose back garden opens directly onto the path which runs at right angles to Roans Dyke. This path cannot be seen from the road, and those two could have been through that gate in less than a couple of minutes.

There is a chance that the attacker escaped through the woods towards the golf course, but there are no outbuildings where he could clean up, and on a bright, light summer evening, he would have risked running into golfers either playing, or using the club house.

Semen and /or sperm heads were found both on and in intimate areas of the body, as well as on outer clothing, underwear, and surface skin. None of it matched the DNA profile of Luke Mitchell.
Unidentified hairs were found all over the body itself, and white stains, believed to be saliva, were found on areas of the clothing. None of these returned DNA matches to Luke Mitchell what is unclear is whether they were, in fact, then tested for matches to anyone else. At the time of the murder, the other two suspects had not even been identified, so it is safe to assume they were not checked for DNA matches. Male number two, identified 3 years later, was not dropped because of any lack of DNA match, since the semen showed a full profile match.

Confused? Me too.


 *&^^&
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 16, 2021, 05:42:16 PM
Feb 28, 2010#164
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 Lean


https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/shirleymckie/luke-mitchell-postings-now-archived-see-new-thread-t398-s160.html
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 16, 2021, 05:49:01 PM
Will post some of Jigsawman later: That lie? blatant of having no other user names out with Angeline, Sandra L and so forth.

“‘Foolsgold’ was claimed to be Billy Middleton?

https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/shirleymckie/luke-mitchell-postings-now-archived-see-new-thread-t398-s160.html
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 16, 2021, 06:46:27 PM
Will post some of Jigsawman later: That lie? blatant of having no other user names out with Angeline, Sandra L and so forth.

This is jigsawman ?

God
*****
member is offline





Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 517

A Timing Puzzle
Thread Started on Jun 4, 2009, 1:26pm
As another anniversary of Jodi's death draws near, I have a question which has puzzled me for a very long time. Can anyone figure this out?

Judith called Luke back at 10.49pm, to say she had called round all of Jodi's friends, she was nowhere to be found, and she (Judith) was calling the police.

Luke responded that he would go out looking for Jodi up the path, and if he didn't find her, he would make his way to Judith's house. The call lasted less than 2 minutes.

Luke got the dog and the torch, and set off immediately. It takes 7 - 8 minutes, at a brisk pace (police timings) to get to the entrance to the path, and 10 - 15 mins to walk the length of the path.

By these timings, Luke would have reached the "bend" in the path which allowed him to see all the way to the Easthouses end at 3 minutes past 11 at the latest. He would have reached the "halfway" point of the path at 8 mins past 11.

Both the other members of the search party and Luke's statement agree that they spotted each other as he came round the bend on the path - I include the halfway point purely for reference.

So far, so good.

But the phone records show that the search party accepted a landline call at the Grandmother's house at 6 minutes past 11, following which they gathered jackets, torches, etc, and set off to search for Jodi.

Even allowing for the latest timings, both parties spotted each other either at 3 mins past 11 (just after the bend) or at 8 minutes past 11 (if it was the halfway point.) Either way, the family members of the search party were "waiting" for Luke - they were already there as he rounded the bend.

How can this be? How can they be taking a call at the grandmother's house at 6 mins past 11, and be at the top of the path at either 3 mins past 11 or 8 mins past 11? Quite simply not possible. Even allowing for the 8 minutes past timing, the call to the landline started at 6 mins past 11, allowing only 2 minutes for the call to be concluded, the gathering of stuff required, the setting off, cutting through playing fields, etc etc etc, to arrive there before Luke did.

The appeal judges then state, categorically, that the search party had "set off from Jodi's house, just a few minute's walk from the beginning of the path" even though the case had always been that they left from the Grandmother's house in Mayfield, around a mile away.

Then there's the mystery of why Judith should agree that Luke should search the path, and the family search party making straight for the path, without even considering looking anywhere else, when every last one of them claimed Jodi was not allowed to use the path on her own and would not have done so.
Link to Post - Back to Top  IP: Logged
blazeholiday
Junior Member
**
member is offline
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 16, 2021, 08:01:16 PM
This is jigsawman ?

God
*****
member is offline





Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 517

A Timing Puzzle
Thread Started on Jun 4, 2009, 1:26pm
As another anniversary of Jodi's death draws near, I have a question which has puzzled me for a very long time. Can anyone figure this out?

Judith called Luke back at 10.49pm, to say she had called round all of Jodi's friends, she was nowhere to be found, and she (Judith) was calling the police.

Luke responded that he would go out looking for Jodi up the path, and if he didn't find her, he would make his way to Judith's house. The call lasted less than 2 minutes.

Luke got the dog and the torch, and set off immediately. It takes 7 - 8 minutes, at a brisk pace (police timings) to get to the entrance to the path, and 10 - 15 mins to walk the length of the path.

Was this on Corinne’s ‘suggestion’ ?

or was there a discussion before hand as Corinne talked about to James English ‘not at this time of night you’re not young man’?

And what does Shane Mitchell’s statement say about the torch ?

How long did it take Shane to find it?

Where did Shane keep the torch and why did Luke not have one of his own ?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: mrswah on May 16, 2021, 08:26:32 PM
Was this on Corinne’s ‘suggestion’ ?

or was there a discussion before hand as Corinne talked about to James English ‘not at this time of night you’re not young man’?

And what does Shane Mitchell’s statement say about the torch ?

How long did it take Shane to find it?

Where did Shane keep the torch and why did Luke have one of his own ?


I can assure you there is nothing unusual about dog walkers using a torch on dark evenings. I see them every evening!
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 16, 2021, 08:47:04 PM

I can assure you there is nothing unusual about dog walkers using a torch on dark evenings. I see them every evening!

Shane wasn’t the ‘dog Walker’ in the house though was he?

Why ‘Shane’s torch’ ?

Wasn’t there a family torch?

What did Corrine use when she took Mia out for a walk when it was dark? Didn’t she have her own torch?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: mrswah on May 16, 2021, 09:45:21 PM
Shane wasn’t the ‘dog Walker’ in the house though was he?

Why ‘Shane’s torch’ ?

Wasn’t there a family torch?

What did Corrine use when she took Mia out for a walk when it was dark? Didn’t she have her own torch?

Shane is a bit of a mystery, isn't he?  We know very little about him. Did he never walk the dog?

I'd love to know more about how he got along with Luke.

Perhaps Corinne walked the dog around the streets, and wouldn't have needed a torch. Luke was going down the secluded path that night-----perhaps that wasn't where he normally walked the dog in the dark evenings.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 24, 2021, 01:55:44 PM
Will post some of Jigsawman later: That lie? blatant of having no other user names out with Angeline, Sandra L and so forth.

‘Sand87’ https://forum.casebook.org/forum/social-chat/other-mysteries/6551-murder-of-jodie-jones/page2

Isn’t Sandra Lean

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: mrswah on May 24, 2021, 06:00:47 PM
‘Sand87’ https://forum.casebook.org/forum/social-chat/other-mysteries/6551-murder-of-jodie-jones/page2

Isn’t Sandra Lean

No, I don't think Sands87 is Sandra Lean either.

But, why all this fuss about Sandra Lean using other names?  We use them.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on May 24, 2021, 06:28:12 PM
No, I don't think Sands87 is Sandra Lean either.

But, why all this fuss about Sandra Lean using other names?  We use them.

There are several reasons....

She also refers to them in her ‘thesis” ⬇️

Excerpt from P.270-271 ‘Hidden in Plain View’ by Sandra Lean

Internet campaigns
‘The steady increase in internet campaigns, although creating an outlet for information which is largely ignored or dismissed by the mainstream print and broadcast media, is orchestrated by individuals who have little or no experience of creating and guiding a large media presence, or how to maintain and increase interest once a case has begun to draw attention. An apparently successful campaign for one high profile case in 2009/2010, which drew several hundred supporters, collapsed amidst a very public, bitter and acrimonious dispute between various contributors.89 There were several consequences, including some contributors and supporters withdrawing from internet advocacy, others withdrawing from some campaigns whilst supporting others, and the creation of a general rift in what had, prior to that, been an encouraging and cohesive group. Anonymous and malicious posting, and posters using multiple online identities, have been an ongoing difficulty for online campaigns (and campaigners), with smear tactics and dishonesty being used to discredit individuals and cases, sometimes spilling over into physical threats and arrests90.
Restrictions in Scotland introduce an added difficulty for individuals wishing to run internet campaigns, as it is an offence to make public many documents used in trials or court proceedings,91 something which is a central part of internet campaigns both in England and in the USA. The ability to make available publicly actual copies of documents used in investigative and trial proceedings is considered to be a strong factor in convincing members of the public that a conviction is wrongful, but in Scotland, the inability to do so leaves open accusations that supporters of wrongly accused/convicted persons cannot “prove‟ that their claims have any basis in truth or fact, and those supporters and campaigners have no way of effectively responding to such accusations.

89 This campaign was beset with difficulties introduced by control issues, contributors who were ignorant of the actual legal processes involved, defensiveness, a tendency for contributors to interpret criticisms and suggestions as personal attacks, and the recurring difficulties of malicious and disingenuous contributors posting under numerous false identities.

90 In the course of this study, four people were arrested for online harassment and intimidation, direct physical threats were made to at least three individuals, including death threats, photographs of individuals‟ homes and family members were posted online, and personal addresses and phone numbers were released. Police in England acted on complaints of online harassment and intimidation, whereas Scottish police refused repeatedly to do so.

91 In Scotland, where case papers are deemed to belong to the solicitor, the solicitor is prohibited from disclosing information to „third parties‟ – for example, statements and expert reports in cases in England and Wales have been incorporated into campaign websites, but this would be an offence in Scotland.

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on October 08, 2021, 06:27:01 PM
Following Simon Halls confession a Steve Sinclair made a comment at the bottom of Professor Julie Price’s Justice Gap article - “A time to take stock” which has recently been removed from the WWW after my communication with Jon Robbins.

On 24th Feb 2014 Steve Sinclair stated:
Now that Simon Hall has apparently taken his own life it is perhaps pertinent to view his “confession” in this new light. I am sure that some will say that his suicide is a certain sign of his anguish over his guilt. I say that, on the contrary, his death may have been through pure despair.
That despair most likely stemmed from the failure of his final appeal.Where was he to go from there? No more new evidence to rely on…the end of the road.
His confession was more than likely sparked by the inevitable realisation that those who are deemed IDOM are unlikely to ever be considered for parole. I don’t need to spell out the treatment IDOM prisoners face compared to those who realise their guilty status and play the game to prepare them for release.
I am not concerned by the kerfuffle over his so called confession. The bald facts of the case are that the conviction of Simon Hall was a miscarriage of justice. There was and still isn’t any evidence on which he should have been convicted.


Not sure if this is the same Steve Sinclair http://www.free-david-ferguson.org.uk/index.php ?

However, the fact Sandra Lean has yet to publicly admit to having been conned by Simon Hall, and indeed by those people she spoke with in order to put together the chapter in her book “No Smoke” should be a red flag for people like Corrine Mitchell and Steve Sinclair.

“I am not concerned by the kerfuffle over his so called confession?” The “kerfuffle” is exactly what people like Steve Sinclair should have been concerned with.

The bald facts of the case are that the conviction of Simon Hall was a miscarriage of justice.” What “bald facts” does he refer to, a version of the “bald facts” presented by Sandra Lean in her book “No Smoke?”

Given Sandra Leans judgement and indeed behaviour following Simon Halls confession I would advise everyone to err on the side of caution regarding any alleged confession in the Luke Mitchell case. Plus it’s more than likely imo Corrine Mitchell will only hear what she wants to hear.

Have a read of [2021] EWCA Crim 1404 - para 18

&

http://www.free-david-ferguson.org.uk/links.php

&

http://www.prisonersmaintaininginnocence.org.uk/cases-and-reports/

&

https://www.kentonline.co.uk/medway/news/brutal-killer-marries-in-prison-42573/
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on December 21, 2021, 03:41:53 PM
There are several reasons....

She also refers to them in her ‘thesis” ⬇️

Excerpt from P.270-271 ‘Hidden in Plain View’ by Sandra Lean

Internet campaigns
‘The steady increase in internet campaigns, although creating an outlet for information which is largely ignored or dismissed by the mainstream print and broadcast media, is orchestrated by individuals who have little or no experience of creating and guiding a large media presence, or how to maintain and increase interest once a case has begun to draw attention. An apparently successful campaign for one high profile case in 2009/2010, which drew several hundred supporters, collapsed amidst a very public, bitter and acrimonious dispute between various contributors.89 There were several consequences, including some contributors and supporters withdrawing from internet advocacy, others withdrawing from some campaigns whilst supporting others, and the creation of a general rift in what had, prior to that, been an encouraging and cohesive group. Anonymous and malicious posting, and posters using multiple online identities, have been an ongoing difficulty for online campaigns (and campaigners), with smear tactics and dishonesty being used to discredit individuals and cases, sometimes spilling over into physical threats and arrests90.
Restrictions in Scotland introduce an added difficulty for individuals wishing to run internet campaigns, as it is an offence to make public many documents used in trials or court proceedings,91 something which is a central part of internet campaigns both in England and in the USA. The ability to make available publicly actual copies of documents used in investigative and trial proceedings is considered to be a strong factor in convincing members of the public that a conviction is wrongful, but in Scotland, the inability to do so leaves open accusations that supporters of wrongly accused/convicted persons cannot “prove‟ that their claims have any basis in truth or fact, and those supporters and campaigners have no way of effectively responding to such accusations.

89 This campaign was beset with difficulties introduced by control issues, contributors who were ignorant of the actual legal processes involved, defensiveness, a tendency for contributors to interpret criticisms and suggestions as personal attacks, and the recurring difficulties of malicious and disingenuous contributors posting under numerous false identities.

90 In the course of this study, four people were arrested for online harassment and intimidation, direct physical threats were made to at least three individuals, including death threats, photographs of individuals‟ homes and family members were posted online, and personal addresses and phone numbers were released. Police in England acted on complaints of online harassment and intimidation, whereas Scottish police refused repeatedly to do so.

91 In Scotland, where case papers are deemed to belong to the solicitor, the solicitor is prohibited from disclosing information to „third parties‟ – for example, statements and expert reports in cases in England and Wales have been incorporated into campaign websites, but this would be an offence in Scotland.

What Sandra Lean omits from the above is some of the anonymous posters were Killer Simon Halls brother Shaun, who also used ‘multiple identities’ and Shaun Hall, Stephanie Bon AND Sandra Lean used ‘smear tactics’ - of which there is a wealth of evidence of - to use to dishonestly discredit individuals and cases

⬇️
https://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2021/12/19/wrongful-convictions-miscarriages-of-justice-innocence-fraud-whats-the-difference/
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on December 21, 2021, 05:19:39 PM
What Sandra Lean omits from the above is some of the anonymous posters were Killer Simon Halls brother Shaun, who also used ‘multiple identities’ and Shaun Hall, Stephanie Bon AND Sandra Lean used ‘smear tactics’ - of which there is a wealth of evidence of - to use to dishonestly discredit individuals and cases

⬇️
https://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2021/12/19/wrongful-convictions-miscarriages-of-justice-innocence-fraud-whats-the-difference/

Sandra Lean has duped so many people, who have no idea what she’s *really* been up to for all these years

⬇️
http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=12082.msg656745#msg656745

"I refer to your recent communications with me, your posts on the Bamber forum, and our previous exchanges.

While I appreciate that fighting a MOJ is an uphill struggle, and a steep learning curve, there are some "mistakes" which cannot be explained as ignorance, enthusiastic but misguided belief, or any of the other well trodden routes most people take on their journey towards justice.

I personally believe that your recent online behaviour, the way you handled Simon's confession to the other burglary, and the consequent attacks of Shaun and Stephanie Bon have all been detrimental to public support for Simon. The letter, supposedly from Simon, was a disgraceful slap in the face to many, many people who have tried to help Simon over the years.

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg384705.html#msg384705

Stephanie also thinks No Smoke should have been withdrawn or revised. I understand Stephanie’s right to feel that way. While she is also entitled to ask questions, I am under no obligation to answer them. However, on this occasion, I choose to address a couple of matters raised by Stephanie for the benefit of others who may be interested.
I spoke with many people (including others whose cases were mentioned or discussed) about the question of withdrawing the book. Not one of them wanted the book withdrawn. There were discussions about possible revisions which would, of necessity, have taken a great deal of time and effort - time and effort that I was not capable of devoting to the matter at that time.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg382961.html#msg382961

I don’t understand her reasoning?

Wouldn’t basic logic suggest going direct to the source?

She goes on:
We will never know if Simon Hall’s confession was genuine, or the confused utterings of a crumbling sanity. The decision about whether to take up, or continue to carry, the baton for claimed Miscarriages of Justice is a matter for the person deciding to do so, and their own conscience.” You see, to this day, we have only Stephanie’s word about the circumstances leading up to the confession, .......

For anyone who doesn’t know about killer Simon Hall’s innocence fraud, which was aided by people like Stephanie Bon and his older brother Shaun Hall (referred to by Sandra Lean above) and Sandra Lean in her book ‘No Smoke’

Here are a few facts Sandra Lean won’t tell anyone ⬇️

http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/the-truth-behind-killer-simon-hall-and-his-enablers-innocence-fraud-phenomenon-scam-%ef%b8%8f/

And without doubt she is behaving the same way in relation to killer Luke Mitchell’s innocence fraud

Sandra Lean and her behaviour will feature in a forthcoming Blog due to be published in the New Year
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on December 21, 2021, 05:36:45 PM
Shane is a bit of a mystery, isn't he?  We know very little about him. Did he never walk the dog?

I'd love to know more about how he got along with Luke.

Perhaps Corinne walked the dog around the streets, and wouldn't have needed a torch. Luke was going down the secluded path that night-----perhaps that wasn't where he normally walked the dog in the dark evenings.

Shane has taken a back seat for a reason, similar to what Phil Hall did
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on December 21, 2021, 08:01:51 PM
Shane has taken a back seat for a reason, similar to what Phil Hall did

There will be more on this in the following Blog series https://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2021/12/19/wrongful-convictions-miscarriages-of-justice-innocence-fraud-whats-the-difference/

Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on December 22, 2021, 01:45:58 PM
‘Analysing Chris Watts and Cindy Watts on the phone’

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YD5P7xVS0rU

I don’t think Corrine Mitchell mentioned the bottles of urine found in Luke’s bedroom during the James English podcast - though found her comments on JF & the ‘condom’ interesting

Corrine Mitchell on JF:
He must have been the kind of person who got off on seeing a dead body - he must have seen her where he was - he must of. But why use a condom for masturbating

Wonder what Luke made of the hedgehog story told by Corrine?

We still have not been told by Corrine Mitchell, or Sandra Lean, whether the alleged hedgehog (The one Corinne spoke to James English about) died on killer Luke Mitchell’s watch or Corinne’s ?

What is it with killers, animals and their mothers?  *&^^&

 👇
https://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2021/12/19/wrongful-convictions-miscarriages-of-justice-innocence-fraud-whats-the-difference/
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on December 22, 2021, 02:27:39 PM
Corrine Mitchell on JF:
He must have been the kind of person who got off on seeing a dead body - he must have seen her where he was - he must of. But why use a condom for masturbating


Corrine Mitchell was in reality referring to her killer son Luke
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on December 22, 2021, 02:29:49 PM
Corrine Mitchell on JF:
He must have been the kind of person who got off on seeing a dead body - he must have seen her where he was - he must of. But why use a condom for masturbating

Why use bottles to pee in when there’s a bathroom near by?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Rusty on January 25, 2022, 12:11:15 AM
Sandra Lean and her behaviour will feature in a forthcoming Blog due to be published in the New Year

When is part 2 due?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on January 25, 2022, 12:11:49 PM
When is part 2 due?

Soon 
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on January 27, 2022, 11:16:19 AM
When is part 2 due?

Do you know anything about this chap https://www.crownservices.org.uk/0ur-staff Rusty?

Peter Jackson, the private detective involved with the Stefan Kiszko case, was said to be ‘a former Royal Air Force police officer

Would you say this is a different fraudster https://thewaltercumpershunterclub.wordpress.com/2022/01/20/peter-jackson-the-walter-mitty-of-otley/ or one and the same?
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Myster on January 27, 2022, 12:06:58 PM
Do you know anything about this chap https://www.crownservices.org.uk/0ur-staff (https://www.crownservices.org.uk/0ur-staff) Rusty?

Peter Jackson, the private detective involved with the Stefan Kiszko case, was said to be ‘a former Royal Air Force police officer

Would you say this is a different fraudster https://thewaltercumpershunterclub.wordpress.com/2022/01/20/peter-jackson-the-walter-mitty-of-otley/ (https://thewaltercumpershunterclub.wordpress.com/2022/01/20/peter-jackson-the-walter-mitty-of-otley/) or one and the same?
He's one and the same I think...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10440771/Ex-mayor-posed-war-hero-love-rat-bought-uniform-EBAY-says-estranged-wife.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10440771/Ex-mayor-posed-war-hero-love-rat-bought-uniform-EBAY-says-estranged-wife.html)

... and the profiles and pics of his "Associates" are fake CVs and stock photos of no-one in particular.
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on January 27, 2022, 12:21:42 PM
He's one and the same I think...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10440771/Ex-mayor-posed-war-hero-love-rat-bought-uniform-EBAY-says-estranged-wife.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10440771/Ex-mayor-posed-war-hero-love-rat-bought-uniform-EBAY-says-estranged-wife.html)

... and the profiles and pics of his "Associates" are fake CVs and stock photos of no-one in particular.

Yes I’ve seen these and am aware of the fake CV’s & stock photo’s etc

I think he’s the same person too but a photograph from around the time of his ‘private investigations’ helping convicted/exonerated killer Stefan Kiszko and his mother would be helpful
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on January 27, 2022, 01:39:10 PM
Do you know anything about this chap https://www.crownservices.org.uk/0ur-staff Rusty?

Peter Jackson, the private detective involved with the Stefan Kiszko case, was said to be ‘a former Royal Air Force police officer

Would you say this is a different fraudster https://thewaltercumpershunterclub.wordpress.com/2022/01/20/peter-jackson-the-walter-mitty-of-otley/ or one and the same?

Peter Jackson’s ‘long suffering’ wife Mrs Jackson

You will just get lies off him

Michael O’Connell ex barrister (On ‘private detective Peter Jackson, a former Royal Air Force police officer’)

He was a superb, objective seeker of truth

Mrs Jackson

'As far as I knew he was in the RMP

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10440771/Ex-mayor-posed-war-hero-love-rat-bought-uniform-EBAY-says-estranged-wife.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10440771/Ex-mayor-posed-war-hero-love-rat-bought-uniform-EBAY-says-estranged-wife.html)

The RMPA are unable to substantiate any claims made by Mr Jackson relating to service in the RMP, or indeed any other such statements made by him on public forums which may lead people to believe that he served and earned any rank, awards, recognitions, qualifications, titles, or honorary rank.

'The RMPA has attempted to approach Mr Jackson via email and phone in order that it may verify with him any of the claims currently causing upset within the wider veterans' community. Such attempts have not elicited a response, at the time of writing
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on January 27, 2022, 02:07:57 PM
He's one and the same I think...

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10440771/Ex-mayor-posed-war-hero-love-rat-bought-uniform-EBAY-says-estranged-wife.html (https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10440771/Ex-mayor-posed-war-hero-love-rat-bought-uniform-EBAY-says-estranged-wife.html)

... and the profiles and pics of his"Associates" are fake CVs and stock photos of no-one in particular.

If it’s the same Peter Jackson why didn’t he simply include Campbell Malone & co on his Website?

Do you know anything about this chap https://www.crownservices.org.uk/0ur-staff Rusty?

Peter Jackson, the private detective involved with the Stefan Kiszko case, was said to be ‘a former Royal Air Force police officer

Would you say this is a different fraudster https://thewaltercumpershunterclub.wordpress.com/2022/01/20/peter-jackson-the-walter-mitty-of-otley/ or one and the same?

It states on Peter Jackson’s website here https://www.crownservices.org.uk/about

‘Crown Services has been established to provide a Solicitor Support Service backed up with Investigative and Bailiff Services to Corporate and Private clients.
 
We are now regarded as one of  the leading Solicitor Support Services around. The company was formed by a former Military Police Special Investigation Branch Sergeant  obtaining a LLB(Hons) and is a member of the International Bar Association (Pro Bono).
 
With over 20 years experience and building an established network of investigators, detectives, bailiffs, solicitors, barristers and researchers throughout the world enabling us to successfully handle matters on a global scale. We can provide you with a range of professional services including tracing individuals, surveillance, background enquiries and process serving plus many other services.
 
Our staff are well versed in civil and criminal law and always undertake enquiries in a discreet and efficient manner using professional methods. The performance and methodology of our staff is under constant review to ensure that our enquiries are conducted in the most thorough and cost-effective manner.
 
Crown Services can provide a wide range of services to private and commercial clients including partner investigations, and surveillance services with photographic evidence, private intelligence on a person’s activities and communications and hidden assets. We investigate insurance claims, work and employee issues, bugging, and background investigations. We also provide evidence for criminal defence and appeals.
 
We are able carry out investigations to uncover hidden assets both within the UK and overseas, financial information, fraud and internet scams, counterfeiting and bogus companies and money laundering.
 
Our forensic investigation services including dna investigations and matching, body fluid and semen testing, fingerprinting and fingerprint matching, handwriting and signature matching, and computer forensics. We have undercover operatives providing intelligence and surveillance services, and overseas personnel able to investigate most situations worldwide…..’
Title: Re: Who Confessed to the Murder?
Post by: Nicholas on January 27, 2022, 02:16:46 PM
This is written by a Peter Jackson

https://thewasp.org/news/how-can-a-private-investigator-help-you