The Speaking Clock
Mitchell phoned the speaking clock at 16:54pm. He was at home, so are we suggesting there were no clocks, televisions, watches or other devices at home? If he wanted to know what the time was, couldn’t he have asked his brother? Findlay never mentioned in the 2008 appeal that he was a frequent user of this service, which is surprising given he would have his phone records. If Mitchell used this frequently, is it reasonable to suggest that this may have been something Findlay would have brought to the attention of the appeal court? He didn’t mention he used it frequently, and also never produced any evidence to show this. One can only assume he only ever phoned this once, with Findlay’s explanation of Mitchell phoning it out of “pure idleness” remaining unsubstantiated and subjective.
Andrina Bryson
Andrina Bryson, a key witness for the Crown, seen a male and a female at the Easthouses end of Roan’s Dyke Path somewhere between 16:50pm and 16:55pm. No two other people were traced, and no two other people have since come forward to say it was them. Given the scale of the Police investigation, this is very surprising. This timeframe (16:50-16:55) also provides an opportunity for Mitchell to call the speaking clock. Bryson can’t be sure of the exact time, therefore Mitchell may have already called this service, or was just about to call it, when he was seen. This explains why Andrina Bryson never mentioned if the person was on a telephone at the time. He had either already phoned it, or was just about to phone it.
Trial by Media and Satanism
People say it was a ‘trial by media’ due to the way Mitchell was treated, portrayed, and considered a suspect. The early reports and headlines of Mitchell being involved in satanism and having an infatuation for this may have appeared prejudicial. However, one only has to read the court appeal in 2011 to discover that he did indeed express an unusual interest in this. Not only was he involved in fights with other pupils and scribbled satanic slogans and emblems on his school work, but he was referred to an educational psychologist at age 11 due to increasingly concerning behaviour. Carrying knives and smoking cannabis was also common, as were writing concerning essays in his English class.
Ridiculous Coincidences and Strange Behaviour
Jodi Jones was murdered in an area known to both of them, evidenced by tree-bark with both their initials present. She was murdered on her way to meet Mitchell. She wasn’t going to meet her gran, mother or sister. She wasn’t going to Tesco to buy groceries. She was going to meet Mitchell.
In 2010, a knife with the name Luke was discovered relatively near to the crime scene. How many people with the name Luke lived in that area between 2003 and 2010? How many of them were passing by and decided to throw a knife away? How many of them carved their name onto this? Please do not forget that Mitchell has a habit of carving his name onto things.
During the investigation, a knife pouch with the carving ‘[Name removed] 1989-2003 The Finest Day I Ever Had Was When Tomorrow Never Came, 666’ was found in Mitchells possession. Coincidentally, another knife had disappeared around the time of the murder. Mitchells mother also ensured her son was safe and healthy during the investigation by comforting him with knives. Not only this, she also ensured he was secure by buying him a tattoo of a skull with flames emanating from it.
When Jodi Jones left her mother's house just before 17:00pm, Mitchell called Alan Ovens twice – once at 17:32pm, and another at 17:40pm. Only the second call connected, where Ovens informed him that Jodi had left to meet him. This indicates that Ovens was aware that she had left to meet him, otherwise he would have asked Mitchell why he was phoning. Jodi had informed Alan Ovens and/or her mother that she was away to meet Mitchell, yet Mitchell failed to raise the alarm when she never appeared. Instead, he proceeds back to Newbattle and discusses with his friend David High that Jodi would not be coming out. Given that he was made aware by Ovens that she had already left, Mitchell can’t have assumed she was staying at home.
It was said that after Mitchells last text at 16:40pm to Jodi, he states he listened to music whilst cooking dinner. However, Ovens said at 17:40pm to Mitchell during a phone call that Jodi had left to meet him, as evidenced in Luke Mitchell v. Her Majesty’s Advocate 2008. Mitchell had replied “ok, cool”. At no point did Mitchell argue with Ovens on the telephone that an arrangement between him and Jodi had not been made. According to this exchange, it is apparent that an arrangement had indeed been made. Why would Jodi lie about who and where she was going? She had no reason to, hence why she told the truth by saying she was away to meet Mitchell.
With regards to Mitchell being at home during this timeframe, it is also evidenced in the appeal papers (Luke Mitchell v. Her Majesty’s Advocate 2008, section 89, that “Shane Mitchells ultimate position in cross-examination appeared to be that he could not be sure whether the appellant was in the house between 1653 and 1716 on the evening of the murder. At its highest, that evidence undermined the appellant's alibi, and allowed an inference that he was more likely out of the house at that time”.