Who Confessed to the Murder?

[Nicholas]

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

[Nicholas]

Plenty of allegations? ??

Thread http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=506.msg14694#msg14694

[faithlilly]

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.

[Nicholas]

"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

[Nicholas]

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.

[Parky41]

Will post some of Jigsawman later: That lie? blatant of having no other user names out with Angeline, Sandra L and so forth.

[faithlilly]

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?

[Nicholas]

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

 

[Nicholas]

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.

 

[Nicholas]

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

[Nicholas]

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

[Nicholas]

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

[Nicholas]

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 ?

[mrswah]

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!

[Nicholas]

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?