Luke Mitchell - Misinformation corrected.

[Nicholas]

From an article in The Herald on 16 September 2018: "A log burner was removed from the family home, to undergo forensic testing."
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16881799.circumstantial-evidence-convicted-luke-mitchell/

The second news story quotes Corinne:

“It (the parka) wouldn’t burn and there was tons of black smoke. There were zips, buckles - you name it.”

Buckles?

Where exactly were the “buckles” on this jacket?

[Nicholas]

Luke Mitchell was 14 years and 11 months by the time he claimed his victim.

By aged 7 he was demonstrating signs of aggression and a violent nature

He was also showing signs of sexual aggression by aged 12

http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2023/02/26/innocence-fraud-killer-luke-mitchell-confidence-trickster-sandra-leans-psychological-manipulation-boiling-you-like-a-frog-part-168/

[Nicholas]

If someone had wanted to do good forensic science (as opposed to making unsupported conjectures)

You didn’t attend the 42 day trial!

You have no idea of ALL the evidence that was heard during those 42 days!

There are many witnesses who gave evidence during the trial, who’s names and evidence has never been reported on!

[Nicholas]

If someone had wanted to do good forensic science (as opposed to making unsupported conjectures)

Do you know what Philip Mitchell and Philip’s partners evidence was?

[faithlilly]

Daily Record:  "The prosecution sought to link this with evidence that a log burner in the back garden of Mitchell’s home had been used around 6.30pm and 7.30pm and later, at around 10pm that night with an unusual smell as reported by neighbours."

From an article in The Herald on 16 September 2018: "A log burner was removed from the family home, to undergo forensic testing."
https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16881799.circumstantial-evidence-convicted-luke-mitchell/

If someone had wanted to do good forensic science (as opposed to making unsupported conjectures), they should have obtained an identical parka and an identical log burner.  Then they should have burned the parka in the log burner and examined the debris.  They should have compared those debris with those from the log burner in question.  I am not sure of the best choice of techniques in this situation, but there are several methods for finding which elements are present, if that would be useful.  Among them are inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICPAES), X-ray fluorescence, and neutron activation analysis (which does not seem to be as commonly performed as it used to be).

The second news story quotes Corinne:

“You can’t accuse me of helping him get rid of all the stuff in my ¬ ¬- as the papers put it - ‘incinerator’ in the back garden. They took the whole thing away, and they didn’t find anything!” she says.

“I did an experiment. We built an exact replica of my log burner that I built in my garden and got an exact replica of Luke’s parka that I was supposed to have burnt - which he never owned anyway at the time. I bought him it after and the cops have the receipt for that.

“It (the parka) wouldn’t burn and there was tons of black smoke. There were zips, buckles - you name it.”

If I read the story from The Herald previously, I had forgotten it.  But now that I have, it seems to me that Corinne was on the right track here.

It really does beggar belief how many pieces of empirical evidence there could have been to prove Luke’s innocence that were merely ignored or not carried out by the investigation team.

[Parky41]

Do you know what Philip Mitchell and Philip’s partners evidence was?

I'm not entirely sure they gave evidence?

[Nicholas]

I'm not entirely sure they gave evidence?

Philip Mitchell and his partner were questioned by the police and gave evidential witness statements

[Parky41]

Philip Mitchell and his partner were questioned by the police and gave evidential witness statements

Without a doubt Nicholas - I'm trying to find out if they were actually called as witnesses however. Certainly never heard anything either way, which is odd in itself.

[Parky41]

Buckles?

Where exactly were the “buckles” on this jacket?

Slip perhaps? - Was he wearing a belt?

[Nicholas]

Without a doubt Nicholas - I'm trying to find out if they were actually called as witnesses however. Certainly never heard anything either way, which is odd in itself.

I’m aware of crucial witnesses in this case who’s names and evidence was never reported on

[Nicholas]

Slip perhaps? - Was he wearing a belt?

Perhaps

How exactly did he carry his knife pouches?

[Nicholas]

Now you’ve finished deflecting back to the 2002 receipt.

Do you know when exactly Philip Mitchell and his partner purchased the Marilyn Manson calendar and where exactly they purchased it from?

[faithlilly]

Do you know when exactly Philip Mitchell and his partner purchased the Marilyn Manson calendar and where exactly they purchased it from?

Where is the 2002 receipt ever mentioned in any reporting of the case? An item as important as the receipt for the murder weapon is never mentioned yet one for a knife that wasn’t is. Not even you can believe that.

[Mr Apples]

Do you know what Philip Mitchell and Philip’s partners evidence was?

I read on one of the comments from one of SF's YT videos that PM said that his son LM owned a German army parka before the murder. The same guy indicated that PM himself had the exact same parka and that both PM & LM were at a music concert (Ramage Inc., perhaps?) together, before the murder, wearing the same parkas. Apparantely, PM was backstage with one of the bands at this gig. He didn't say who else was at the concert with PM & LM. Make of that what you will........

[Mr Apples]

Continued to not give a $hit after he butchered his victim, parting, $hagging, taking drugs, enjoying the limelight.

Exactly, Rusty. This part of your post isn't talked about enough, yet it's particularly apposite. Within the first week of the murder, he was partying at a nightclub called 'Studio 24', boasting to schoolmates & guys he knew that he was a murder suspect (there's an article in the public domain about this). Very much living it up and enjoying himself. An ex-girlfriend talked about him walking around Woodburn 'like a strutting peacock', lapping up the attention and not having a care in the world (this, too, is in the public domain). As for the Sky interview, he was totally emotionless, monosyllabic & monotone throughout. Corinne looked drained & extremely worried . . . the guilt and fear was plain to see on her face.