Luke Mitchell Theories

[Venturi Swirl]

I always find it interesting that while Parky and his compadres ridicule the idea of [Name removed] and [Name removed] becoming unwittingly embroiled in a murder of their friend’s making they see nothing wrong with believing that Luke, a fourteen year old boy with no previous criminal experience, was able to commit a horrific murder, a murder where even the police said that the perpetrator would be covered in blood, without a spec of unexplained DNA on him. Not only that but managed to change his clothes, if the eyewitnesses were to be believed, at least three times in the space of around 20 minutes without anyone seeing him return to the house where he lived to retrieve clean clothes or get cleaned up. That the three witnesses who were with him when he found the body didn’t no, really, honestly didn't change their story, even though it’s obvious that they did. Astonishing!

And yet after all the subterfuge used to create an alibi he lets it slip that his mother had a fire that night. Shoddy!

So is that what you believe happened?  The two moped boys accidentally witnessed a murder taking place and decided to cover up for a friend?  Why could that person not have been Mitchell?  One regularly sold drugs to him, no?  Why come forward to the police at all in any case?  And - in court didn’t the forensics expert testify under oath that the murderer would not necessarily have been covered in blood?  But you believe that this conspiracy also includes members of Jodi’s family, so at least 5 people involved, including the mother of the victim?  That really does stretch credulity yes, I can see why that idea is ridiculed.

[William Wallace]

If they didn’t commit the murder then why the need to dispose of the moped?  Did he say he had his haircut so as to not be mistaken for the killer and if so where was this reported?  Where precisely was this bleach found? How far from the site of the body was this?  Why is it not possible that Mitchell introduced bleach to the scene?  How did the murderer covered in blood leave the scene?  Previously it was suggested on a moped - how would that have been physically possible when that would have meant at least 3 people leaving the scene on a clapped out old banger?

Ok good questions. I'll answer them to the best of my knowledge. If F and D knew absolutely nothing and were up there having a picnic, they wouldn't have took 5 days to come forward. Anyone else would have gone straight to the Police to assure them they had absolutely nothing to do with it and told them please examine that moped right now as you will find no trace of anyone's blood or DNA on it that shouldn't be there. Instead they made sure the moped disappeared first and they made such a good job of it, it was never found.

F definitely said that was why he had his hair cut off. I cannot recall who it was said to, but I can find out.

The bleached areas were not far away. The dogs were searching around the area where the body was found so the bleach must have been found relatively nearby. That would make sense, because anyone moving the body did so for a reason, probably to avoid forensic analysis of the actual place the murder happened, but it would be reasonable to assume they wouldn't be spending much time doing that hence the body was probably not moved far. How far is anyone's guess.

I think we can rule out Mitchell at age 14/15 bleaching the area because how would he know bleach would stop dogs picking up the scent? I didn't know that until I read about it and most people just wouldn't know about that.

Where the killer went afterwards is most definitely baffling. I mean this wasn't just a stabbing, the injuries were absolutely horrendous. People who say the killer might not have had blood on them are just being absolutely nonsensical.

The way the killer could have left on the moped is if either F or D took him on the back of it and one of them then left the area on foot by disappearing into the woods. That would explain how the killer disappeared without any trace. It would also explain why F cut his hair off, because he knew who did it. It would also explain why that moped also disappeared in a hurry and was never traced. It would also explain why neither F or D could remember anything in Court about what they were doing when the moped was parked at the V, but there was no sign of them. They obviously parked at the V for a reason, to go through it. Where else could they have gone up there? The answer is nowhere because opposite the V is an open field with absolutely nothing in it. This is why I say they saw something or were involved, because they were almost certainly over that V at the alleged time of the murder. It's quite incredible that they were never made suspects considering all of that.

Those 2 drove that moped up the path from Easthouses to Newbattle and were seen in the yard of Basically Tool Hire just before closing time, so about 4.55-5.00pm. So they must have entered the path at the Easthouses end at about 4.45pm which means they should have passed Mitchell on their way to Newbattle who supposedly walked that path between about 4.35pm and 4.55pm. They didn't see him.

[Venturi Swirl]

Thanks William for your considered responses, however I remain unconvinced.  I will address each section in a separate post to explain why and with further questions.  Some of the answers may already be well known however I ask them from a position of genuinely not knowing the answers.

First off:

Ok good questions. I'll answer them to the best of my knowledge. If F and D knew absolutely nothing and were up there having a picnic, they wouldn't have took 5 days to come forward. Anyone else would have gone straight to the Police to assure them they had absolutely nothing to do with it and told them please examine that moped right now as you will find no trace of anyone's blood or DNA on it that shouldn't be there. Instead they made sure the moped disappeared first and they made such a good job of it, it was never found.

F definitely said that was why he had his hair cut off. I cannot recall who it was said to, but I can find out.

I think it isan assumption that anyone would come forward to the police straight away even in high profile cases.  Look at the McCann case.  Half a dozen or so people all from the same family saw a man carrying a child through the small town that Madeleine went missing in on the night of the disappearance, a child that they described as very young and female.  In a holiday village in which the biggest news story of the decade broke.  It took them 4 weeks to come forward to give their statements to the police.  Why on earth did it take them so long?  There is no reason that makes any sense but nor is there any suggestion that they were involved.  They just didn’t. 
So, it took these moped boys 5 days to come forward.  What precise day did they dispose of this moped?  Was it the day after the murder?  Did they tell that to the police, if not when did the police become aware that the moped had been disposed of?  Why, if they were involved in the murder did they come forward at all?  And if they were involved why does that necessarily mean Mitchell was not involved, if you don’t believe either of these boys committed the murder?  You’ve painted a scenario of them aiding and abetting a murderer, why could that not have been Mitchell?  What would their motive have been for getting involved in the first place?  Perhaps if they had witnessed the murder taking place and done nothing to stop it from happening but why could it not have been Mitchell they saw committing the crime?  Perhaps they were too ashamed to admit they did not try to stop him, they may even have helped him.  Why is this scenario not possible if the scenario of them helping a.n. other murderer to get away is.  As for the haircut, this remains hearsay from what I can gather and I can’t pass comment on what to me appears to be a rumour, unless you have a cite.

[Venturi Swirl]

The bleached areas were not far away. The dogs were searching around the area where the body was found so the bleach must have been found relatively nearby. That would make sense, because anyone moving the body did so for a reason, probably to avoid forensic analysis of the actual place the murder happened, but it would be reasonable to assume they wouldn't be spending much time doing that hence the body was probably not moved far. How far is anyone's guess.

I think we can rule out Mitchell at age 14/15 bleaching the area because how would he know bleach would stop dogs picking up the scent? I didn't know that until I read about it and most people just wouldn't know about that.

. I think this bleach thing is a complete red herring.  I also think if you’re going to assume that most people wouldn’t know that bleach puts off dogs detecting blood odour then it follows that it wouldn’t be something known to two oiks on a clapped out moped either. 

[Venturi Swirl]

Where the killer went afterwards is most definitely baffling. I mean this wasn't just a stabbing, the injuries were absolutely horrendous. People who say the killer might not have had blood on them are just being absolutely nonsensical.

well that includes a forensic expert under oath in court then.  I think the claim was that if the murderer was behind the victim reaching round to cut the neck that the blood would gush out frontwards and little of it would go onto the assailant. I’m not an expert but wounds inflicted post mortem would not bleed out as severely I believe.  Out of interest and by the by, was Jodi stabbed theough her clothes or after they had been removed?   Is it possible that Mitchell (or the murderer if you prefer)  left Jodie for dead by hitting / strangling / stabbing and then returned later that evening to mutilate the corpse?

[Venturi Swirl]

The way the killer could have left on the moped is if either F or D took him on the back of it and one of them then left the area on foot by disappearing into the woods. That would explain how the killer disappeared without any trace. It would also explain why F cut his hair off, because he knew who did it. It would also explain why that moped also disappeared in a hurry and was never traced. It would also explain why neither F or D could remember anything in Court about what they were doing when the moped was parked at the V, but there was no sign of them. They obviously parked at the V for a reason, to go through it. Where else could they have gone up there? The answer is nowhere because opposite the V is an open field with absolutely nothing in it. This is why I say they saw something or were involved, because they were almost certainly over that V at the alleged time of the murder. It's quite incredible that they were never made suspects considering all of that.

Those 2 drove that moped up the path from Easthouses to Newbattle and were seen in the yard of Basically Tool Hire just before closing time, so about 4.55-5.00pm. So they must have entered the path at the Easthouses end at about 4.45pm which means they should have passed Mitchell on their way to Newbattle who supposedly walked that path between about 4.35pm and 4.55pm. They didn't see him.

I’ve more or less covered the first bit in a previous response.  On the face of it, yes their presence there is troubling.  Perhaps they were involved, perhaps they were simply up to no good and their presence is a coincidence.  They do happen.  But if they were involved then I don’t see why that precludes Mitchell from being the murderer.  It’s more likely that if they were involved that they actually commited the murder, but then why come forward to the police 5 days later?  If they had been present and/or committed the murder they couldn’t guarantee that the police hadn’t foundevidence to link them to the murder by that point.  Seems very risky.  And why did the police go looking for the moped if they weren’t thoroughly investigated or ever considered suspects?  What were the police doing for 10 months before charges were eventually brought against Mitchell, if not investigating and eliminating suspects such as these two?  Out of interest did either of them have a history of violence especially towards women or did either go on to commit violent crimes?

[Parky41]

Some reality. - Early hours of July 1st, from first information gathering statements, it was put out in the media that the victim had left home around 5:30pm to go meet her boyfriend.

JF, one of the moped boys was on Lady path an hr before this, he was going to pick his cousin up in Dalkeith. He did not drive down the RDP, he is said to have driven along Lady path, entering the woodland trails near to the AB sighting. Into the Golf course/Abbey woods. After collecting his cousin they came back via the tool hire place. They were in the tool hire place at close of day/just after, 5pm. The bike was not running, pushing it down out of there then up Newbattle Road. They could not have entered the path before 5:10pm, home again for approx 5:30pm.

Not really in the vicinity at all for what was initially deemed as the important time! Further information is gathered, accurate times had begun to be ascertained, and an appeal went out for them to go forward - Which they did do.

CM and SL's joint theory - 'How easy would it be to take a bike to a scrappy, throw it into the back of a van with knife and bloodied clothing, crush it and gone forever' - The bike was taken to the local scrap yard, it did lie there for weeks. The place was/is NOT equipped with any crusher. A yard that gathered scrap, taken it in bulk 'once and a while' when built up enough to earn money off.

The hair cut nonsense - JF had cut his own hair. It was DF who attempted to infer that he had cut it because of the following. 'Had he read the appeal for the mystery male? Did he cut his hair off should people think the male was him? Nothing to do with trying to not look like the killer. It is a yarn that has been spun, usual Chinese whispers growing all sorts of arms and legs. Put to the boy, 'well you could not possibly have been there anyway if you were down here in the hire place?'

It is also claimed that the boys were eliminated the minute they went forward, again nonsense. Eliminated from being appealed for only. A long investigation into them ensued, it is every piece of information from that long investigation, handed over to DF on a plate for him to use. Showing how much they were investigated, eliminated in the process.

VS you are correct. Having those boys in the area in what turned out to be the crucial time, had them investigated along with LM and not in place of him.

[faithlilly]

Some reality. - Early hours of July 1st, from first information gathering statements, it was put out in the media that the victim had left home around 5:30pm to go meet her boyfriend.

JF, one of the moped boys was on Lady path an hr before this, he was going to pick his cousin up in Dalkeith. He did not drive down the RDP, he is said to have driven along Lady path, entering the woodland trails near to the AB sighting. Into the Golf course/Abbey woods. After collecting his cousin they came back via the tool hire place. They were in the tool hire place at close of day/just after, 5pm. The bike was not running, pushing it down out of there then up Newbattle Road. They could not have entered the path before 5:10pm, home again for approx 5:30pm.

Not really in the vicinity at all for what was initially deemed as the important time! Further information is gathered, accurate times had begun to be ascertained, and an appeal went out for them to go forward - Which they did do.

CM and SL's joint theory - 'How easy would it be to take a bike to a scrappy, throw it into the back of a van with knife and bloodied clothing, crush it and gone forever' - The bike was taken to the local scrap yard, it did lie there for weeks. The place was/is NOT equipped with any crusher. A yard that gathered scrap, taken it in bulk 'once and a while' when built up enough to earn money off.

The hair cut nonsense - JF had cut his own hair. It was DF who attempted to infer that he had cut it because of the following. 'Had he read the appeal for the mystery male? Did he cut his hair off should people think the male was him? Nothing to do with trying to not look like the killer. It is a yarn that has been spun, usual Chinese whispers growing all sorts of arms and legs. Put to the boy, 'well you could not possibly have been there anyway if you were down here in the hire place?'

It is also claimed that the boys were eliminated the minute they went forward, again nonsense. Eliminated from being appealed for only. A long investigation into them ensued, it is every piece of information from that long investigation, handed over to DF on a plate for him to use. Showing how much they were investigated, eliminated in the process.

VS you are correct. Having those boys in the area in what turned out to be the crucial time, had them investigated along with LM and not in place of him.

A couple of things. It was [Name removed] who supplied Luke with his drugs. An older, more worldly-wiser drug dealer yet no charges were ever laid against him but were against Luke for supplying. You have to ask yourself why? His sidekick [Name removed] with a history of violence towards women yet never considered a suspect. Again why?

Further appeals were put out for the moped boys, the man seen following Jodi and a young woman with a pram yet no appeal for the couple seen standing at the entrance to RDP by Bryson. Again why?

CCTV footage was collected showing the route home taken by Corrine Mitchell and Allan Ovens but no footage showing the route taken by arguably the most important eye-witness in the whole case Andrina Bryson. Once and for all all doubt could have been removed with regard to the  timing of Bryson’s sighting yet it didn’t happen. Was the police’s disinterest merely incompetence or something more sinister? Were they afraid that the video would show that Bryson’s timings in her first statements were indeed correct and blow wide open the case?

I really don’t believe that you’re still labouring this point but [Name removed] admitted in court that his motorbike had been parked at the wall behind which Jodi’s body had been found at the time that the police estimated that Jodi had been killed.

From the Scotsman November 2004.

“Under lengthy cross-examination by the defence QC, Donald Findlay, he agreed that after the death he changed his appearance by hacking off his hair, delayed in going to the police, mis-stated the time he had been at the path, and had been ostracised by some of Jodi’s family. Each time Mr Findlay asked if he had murdered Jodi, he replied: "No."

“ On the day of the killing he had ridden an old moped down Roan’s Dyke path to meet his cousin and close friend, Gordon [Name removed], at Newbattle. The court was told that witnesses in the area put the time of hearing a noisy moped and seeing two youths at or shortly after 5pm. Mr [Name removed] said the pair used the path on the return journey.

Mr Findlay asked what time Mr [Name removed] had told the police he and his cousin were heading up the path. The witness said: "Around five o’clock." Mr Findlay told him to be careful and asked again. He said: "Before five o’clock... I cannot exactly remember."

The QC read from a statement which said "about half-past four". He suggested that that time was about 45 minutes out, and asked for an explanation.

Mr [Name removed] said he had looked at a clock when he got into Mr [Name removed]’s house, and it said a quarter to five. It had been wrong. Mr Findlay continued: "You and [Name removed] may have been in the area at or about the time that Jodi may have been attacked, yet you saw nothing and heard nothing?" Mr [Name removed] answered: "No."

Mr Findlay: "You would have the jury believe you know nothing?"

Mr [Name removed]: "Yes."

The witness agreed that the moped had been stopped at a break in a wall, behind which Jodi’s body was discovered, and that he seemed to be "piling up a rather substantial list of coincidences". He said he did not know why he had not gone to the police for several days, nor told any of Jodi’s family he had been on the path that evening.

He added that he was supposed to go to Jodi’s home that night to see her brother, Joseph, but decided against it. Mr Findlay described that as "another remarkable coincidence".

Mr [Name removed] accepted that he had changed his appearance, by hacking at his curly hair. Asked why he had been so desperate to get rid of if, he replied: "I do not like curly hair."

He said he was no longer welcome at his grandmother’s house. He had been told by Jodi’s mother that "Joseph was going to batter me."

Mr Findlay, who suggested Mr [Name removed] would lie when it suited him, asked: "Did you murder Jodi? Did Gordon [Name removed] murder Jodi? Did the two of you together murder Jodi?"

To each question, Mr [Name removed] replied: "No."

https://www.scotsman.com/news/ex-drug-dealer-denies-he-was-behind-murder-of-cousin-jodi-2509760

[Venturi Swirl]

A couple of things. It was [Name removed] who supplied Luke with his drugs. An older, more worldly-wiser drug dealer yet no charges were ever laid against him but were against Luke for supplying. You have to ask yourself why? His sidekick [Name removed] with a history of violence towards women yet never considered a suspect. Again why?

Further appeals were put out for the moped boys, the man seen following Jodi and a young woman with a pram yet no appeal for the couple seen standing at the entrance to RDP by Bryson. Again why?

CCTV footage was collected showing the route home taken by Corrine Mitchell and Allan Ovens but no footage showing the route taken by arguably the most important eye-witness in the whole case Andrina Bryson. Once and for all all doubt could have been removed with regard to the  timing of Bryson’s sighting yet it didn’t happen. Was the police’s disinterest merely incompetence or something more sinister? Were they afraid that the video would show that Bryson’s timings in her first statements were indeed correct and blow wide open the case?

I really don’t believe that you’re still labouring this point but [Name removed] admitted in court that his motorbike had been parked at the wall behind which Jodi’s body had been found at the time that the police estimated that Jodi had been killed.

From the Scotsman November 2004.

“Under lengthy cross-examination by the defence QC, Donald Findlay, he agreed that after the death he changed his appearance by hacking off his hair, delayed in going to the police, mis-stated the time he had been at the path, and had been ostracised by some of Jodi’s family. Each time Mr Findlay asked if he had murdered Jodi, he replied: "No."

“ On the day of the killing he had ridden an old moped down Roan’s Dyke path to meet his cousin and close friend, Gordon [Name removed], at Newbattle. The court was told that witnesses in the area put the time of hearing a noisy moped and seeing two youths at or shortly after 5pm. Mr [Name removed] said the pair used the path on the return journey.

Mr Findlay asked what time Mr [Name removed] had told the police he and his cousin were heading up the path. The witness said: "Around five o’clock." Mr Findlay told him to be careful and asked again. He said: "Before five o’clock... I cannot exactly remember."

The QC read from a statement which said "about half-past four". He suggested that that time was about 45 minutes out, and asked for an explanation.

Mr [Name removed] said he had looked at a clock when he got into Mr [Name removed]’s house, and it said a quarter to five. It had been wrong. Mr Findlay continued: "You and [Name removed] may have been in the area at or about the time that Jodi may have been attacked, yet you saw nothing and heard nothing?" Mr [Name removed] answered: "No."

Mr Findlay: "You would have the jury believe you know nothing?"

Mr [Name removed]: "Yes."

The witness agreed that the moped had been stopped at a break in a wall, behind which Jodi’s body was discovered, and that he seemed to be "piling up a rather substantial list of coincidences". He said he did not know why he had not gone to the police for several days, nor told any of Jodi’s family he had been on the path that evening.

He added that he was supposed to go to Jodi’s home that night to see her brother, Joseph, but decided against it. Mr Findlay described that as "another remarkable coincidence".

Mr [Name removed] accepted that he had changed his appearance, by hacking at his curly hair. Asked why he had been so desperate to get rid of if, he replied: "I do not like curly hair."

He said he was no longer welcome at his grandmother’s house. He had been told by Jodi’s mother that "Joseph was going to batter me."

Mr Findlay, who suggested Mr [Name removed] would lie when it suited him, asked: "Did you murder Jodi? Did Gordon [Name removed] murder Jodi? Did the two of you together murder Jodi?"

To each question, Mr [Name removed] replied: "No."

https://www.scotsman.com/news/ex-drug-dealer-denies-he-was-behind-murder-of-cousin-jodi-2509760

so if they did it, why do you also appear to believe Jodi’s family were covering up as well?  How does that work?  Feel free to surreptitiously insert your answer to me in your response to someone else’s post if replying to me directly causes you too much discomfort. 😂

[KenMair]

A couple of things. It was [Name removed] who supplied Luke with his drugs. An older, more worldly-wiser drug dealer yet no charges were ever laid against him but were against Luke for supplying. You have to ask yourself why? His sidekick [Name removed] with a history of violence towards women yet never considered a suspect. Again why?

Out of interest, how much older was LM's drug supplier? A year or two at most? Do you have a source for the "sidekick's" history of violence towards women? By your own standards, a cite please?

[faithlilly]

Out of interest, how much older was LM's drug supplier? A year or two at most? Do you have a source for the "sidekick's" history of violence towards women? By your own standards, a cite please?

He was a drug dealer supplying schoolchildren. Why wasn’t he arrested?

The fact that [Name removed] dabbled in violence is no secret in his home town. Isn’t it enough to state something on here for it to become real? Remember the Shane Mitchell stories that you tried to pedal without an ounce of proof never mind a cite?

[Venturi Swirl]

He was a drug dealer supplying schoolchildren. Why wasn’t he arrested?

The fact that [Name removed] dabbled in violence is no secret in his home town. Isn’t it enough to state something on here for it to become real? Remember the Shane Mitchell stories that you tried to pedal without an ounce of proof never mind a cite?

Mitchell apparently dabbled in violence towards females too prior to the murder, but I doubt you accept that for one moment.

[KenMair]

He was a drug dealer supplying schoolchildren. Why wasn’t he arrested?

The fact that [Name removed] dabbled in violence is no secret in his home town. Isn’t it enough to state something on here for it to become real? Remember the Shane Mitchell stories that you tried to pedal without an ounce of proof never mind a cite?

Maybe the fact that the schoolchild he supplied committed murder meant their resources were being applied elsewhere. I've never asked for cites but as soon as something you don't agree with is, you do. If you want to apply the local gossip angle then I'll stand by my SM beliefs based on personal experience. The only person I know peddling your violent theory is a protected police informant if local gossip is to believed.

[faithlilly]

Maybe the fact that the schoolchild he supplied committed murder meant their resources were being applied elsewhere. I've never asked for cites but as soon as something you don't agree with is, you do. If you want to apply the local gossip angle then I'll stand by my SM beliefs based on personal experience. The only person I know peddling your violent theory is a protected police informant if local gossip is to believed.

[Name removed]’s own family disowned him. Why do you think that was? Why did [Name removed] threaten to batter him?

You never ask for cites as I think even you can recognise that it would be rank hypocrisy as you never supply any.

A protected police informant who is close enough to the individual to get that sort of information or why would the police use them as an informant?

[Parky41]

You are correct Kenmair, there was little between the boys age wise. But one was a minor dealing drugs, the other not so much. One admitted to doing so, the other not so much.

The constant application of the boys bike being stopped on that path - Where there was no eye witness to it being stopped at any V break, therefore there was no eyewitness to seeing any bike without those boys with it. There is no evidence, neither has there ever been any evidence of those boys being over that wall. And as everyone knows now, the person who claimed to see that bike was driving on The Beeches, over the expanse of that field, driving in a 60mph zone to boot.

Ms lean before attempted to say they were going slow, turning their car about because they had forgotten something at work. Makes not a damn bit of difference, it was still across the expanse of that field. And as anyone can see from videos, from testimony, the V break is fully obscured from any view by those trees, that canopy.

But as the scraping continues, any information gathered into that intensive investigation of those boys - We are left with those clear facts. They were investigated and eliminated. They were upon both those paths a short time. There is no evidence of them being in the woodland. The original times in place gave reason as to why they had not went forward at first. There was no forensic evidence found of any altercation taken place bar that select area within the bottom of that woodland strip. Not a snifter of those boys at the actual locus or the victim. Nothing of any of their imaginary 'suspects' of course.

CCTV that old chestnut, again - Morning, Noon and night, a typical corner shop equipped with CCTV, fuel station the same. Coop, Scotmid none. Banks who in time placed cameras at their dispensers. The one in Gorebridge to the front of the store. There was no CCTV to do with AB because there was none. Very much why her till receipt was being used until discovering the mechanism was faulty. But thankfully that corner shop did have some, because CM would not have been "caught" somewhere other than where she claimed to have been.

We can await the full transcripts if they are ever put up to do with the boys. No doubt there will be some surprises all round, more amendments to be made from a false narrative fed? Around 7 hrs each I believe, just wow! That really was a deep investigation into them, wasn't it just?