The POLICE were too STUPID to fathom this out

[faithlilly]

Did this incident ever take place, do you know?  (Or, does anyone know?).

Mrs Jones denied it ever happened.

First you have to ask yourself why JuJ was at Corrine’s place of work in the first place, then why were the police called?

I think that should give you your answer.

[faithlilly]

The heading of this thread, is it the police who were too stupid? Or simply that continuous fallacy of reasoning.

The duo on the moped.

The information given, from an employee from Basically Tool Hire and others was used to put the appeal out for these boys. Around a certain time frame. These boys, were very much "persons of interest" They were not only in the locality of where Jodi met her death, one of the boys, was also a cousin of Jodi. Both boys were friends with Luke Mitchell, the common link Jodi and cannabis. From here we shall tell a different story, more accurate, in context, of all information/evidence as opposed to that of this continuing suspicion.

Firstly, most of what is put out comes from JF's (Jodi's cousin) statements, and here I put a question out on this. There are continuous claims that this lad may not be the brightest spark, not the most intelligent. Is he therefore the one primarily chosen to keep that flame of doubt from snuffing out for this very reason - choose quite literally the simplest target?  A compulsive liar it is claimed  What do we actually know however about this boy, prior to the appeal going out:

What we know is this lad did not attempt to hide the fact he had been on this path, by the very next morning he had told his gran he had been on it. That he had been in that vicinity. This may very well have been due to knowing they had been seen, not only by getting chased from Basically Tool hire, but of arriving back to GD's, parents, neighbours, others who gave an account of the boys time home, of this duo and their noisy bike. Of JF telling his gran he had gotten back to GD's around 4.30pm. (the clock was out by one hour, it had not been moved forward) Remember here, that his gran would have been aware at this point that Jodi had not left home until around 5pm or after. (prior to verification of times) Believing at this point it would seem, that there would be no relevance in her grandson being in the vicinity as Jodi would still have been at home.

However, there are two of them, they would obviously know without a doubt the time they were on this path, but did they know what time Jodi had left home? Why would they?  All we are really told is JF 'hacked off' his hair' He gave no reason for this other than that is was a mess.  Perhaps he was trying to distance himself from this murder, rather a silly action of course? Especially since he had already told his gran, and of course those 'many' witness's who had saw him, people he knew, not just strangers. And those 'gloves'  in his relatives house, wet with a condom inside them (still in wrapper, hidden he claimed from his niece) And we have to ask ourselves again. That very rational question, our common sense - That these gloves had absolutely nothing to do with Jodi's murder. Irrespective of these wild claims of intelligence, would they not have been carted off with this claimed disappearance of the bike.

Next, the appeal: The police are asking for the boys to come forward and they do so. Evasive we are told and evasive is the information given out on this? as;

What we do know for absolute certainty is the following. The boys did not enter this path until around 5.10pm as opposed to those claims of it being 5pm - 5.05pm, we know this for several reasons. Firstly these boys were still in Basically Tool Hire between those 5mins. We know this as the employee finished work at 5pm. It was after coming out of work, to go home that he had to chase the boys from here. These boys had a heavy bike, that they had great difficulty in getting started. They were pushing it and trying to start it uphill to the entrance to this path. We know they could not have entered this path until after 5.10pm as the cyclist was on the path at this time. He did not see the boys. The approx: time LK heard 'noises' was around 5.15pm. The account the boys gave was approximation of how long they thought they had been on the path. 20-30mins. We know however it is closer to the 20mins: mark as they did arrive home at 5.30pm. Witnessed. It is all very well swerving away from the witness's on the other side of this path, of the boys arrival home, knowing however the only reason for doing so. As it does not serve purpose for the following.

So we have, this approx time of 20mins of these boys getting the bike started and riding up and down the path "a couple" of times, then home. Their 'truthful account' was verified. One mention here also of LK, of worrying that suspicion may have fallen upon him, for that very simple reason, of being in the locality of where this girl was murdered. Perhaps the most simplest reason, also, as to why these boys did not instantly come forward. 'What if they think it was us' . They were right, the police very much interested at first, until eliminated - but to this very day, they have no peace. Consistently put forward and discussed by that very person at the fore front of this 'Justice' campaign. For being on this bike for some 20mins on both Roansdyke  and Lady path before arriving home. That window of opportunity to kill Jodi. of two boys, no DNA found at the actual locus, nothing from the V - zilch. Of multiple witness's from 5.30pm onwards. 

The claimed sighting of this bike at 5.15pm against this V riderless - Sounds the part? Firstly note what is missing from below - there is no verbatim used. There is very good reason for this is there not? Perhaps due to there being a  world of difference between someone saying the bike was "close" to where there is a V break in the wall as opposed to being at it? How do we know this sighting at the V did not take place. You simply can not see the V in this wall from 'The Beeches' or 'Newbattle R'd' and we know the witness was not driving a tractor, as you would have to be in the actual field, close to the path to see this V. It is of course unsurprising that this type of claimed sighting would hold substantial weight from across an expansive field, yet AB's sighting, description of clothing, almost 80% and that positive ID of LM is dismissed due to the logo.  Both were travelling in a car, one close the other some distance away. That fallacy of reasoning? It is also unsurprising that this employee may have thought the bike was at a standstill and riderless. They were driving, moving much faster than a bike the boys were attempting to start.

SL:


Below is a link to 'The Beeches' Look immediately to your right. Across that expansive field. Not for the V, you simply can not see it but of the reliability on what this employee could have made out? Therefore, not only was the approximation of time 5.15pm incorrect, there was no sighting of this bike, riderless at the V break in the wall.

Before you continue to Google Maps

I know that I should feel the urge to rebut this particular pile of piffle from your good self but tbh I simply can’t be bothered. If members don’t question the veracity of your posts after the ‘laddie’ debacle then I really can’t help them.

[mrswah]

First you have to ask yourself why JuJ was at Corrine’s place of work in the first place, then why were the police called?

I think that should give you your answer.

Do we know whether or not she was ever there?  Or whether the police were called?  I don't believe everything I read in newspapers!!

[Brietta]

Do we know whether or not she was ever there?  Or whether the police were called?  I don't believe everything I read in newspapers!!

As you say - NEWSPAPERS!

Jodi's mum said it didn't happen.  Had she not been there I think she would have qualified that statement by saying so and apparently she did return the gift of flowers to Corrine on the day of Jodi's funeral which she and her son had laid on Jodi's grave.  Without confrontation;  so who knows.

The fact remains that the matter was fully investigated by the police with no further action being taken which seems to be the end of a non-story.

[faithlilly]

Do we know whether or not she was ever there?  Or whether the police were called?  I don't believe everything I read in newspapers!!

Corrine says that JuJ came to her place of work slightly the worse for wear. While there Corrine was assaulted in some way by JuJ and her glasses were broken as a consequence. The police were called but no charges were brought.

If you believe that Corrine is a liar then of course you won’t believe her.

[Paranoid Android]

Under the circumstances, it's not hard to believe that JuJ wanted to punch CM's lights out.

Under the same circumstances, it's maybe not hard to understand why the cops might want to let JuJ off with a warning,

That's if the alleged incident took place.

[mrswah]

Corrine says that JuJ came to her place of work slightly the worse for wear. While there Corrine was assaulted in some way by JuJ and her glasses were broken as a consequence. The police were called but no charges were brought.

If you believe that Corrine is a liar then of course you won’t believe her.

One said it happened and one said it didn't, so somebody is either lying or exaggerating, or the journalist was stirring things up.  Who knows?

[faithlilly]

Under the circumstances, it's not hard to believe that JuJ wanted to punch CM's lights out.

Under the same circumstances, it's maybe not hard to understand why the cops might want to let JuJ off with a warning,

That's if the alleged incident took place.

I agree. I too can understand why JuJ, perhaps the worse for wear, would want to take her grief and anger out on Corrine, the next best thing to Luke and I can understand why Corrine and/or the police didn’t want to press charges.

Why someone would want to make up the incident, that’s what I don’t understand.

[faithlilly]

One said it happened and one said it didn't, so somebody is either lying or exaggerating, or the journalist was stirring things up.  Who knows?

You pays your money I suppose.

[Holly Goodhead]

I agree. I too can understand why JuJ, perhaps the worse for wear, would want to take her grief and anger out on Corrine, the next best thing to Luke and I can understand why Corrine and/or the police didn’t want to press charges.

Why someone would want to make up the incident, that’s what I don’t understand.

No idea if it happened or not but such a situation arose in the case of Stefan Kiszko:

Molseed's father, Frederick Anderson, had hurled a volley of angry verbal abuse at Kiszko's mother outside the court, after her son was convicted. Anderson had also told the media that he would be outside the prison gates waiting for Kiszko should he ever be released.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed#Release_and_death

[faithlilly]

No idea if it happened or not but such a situation arose in the case of Stefan Kiszko:

Molseed's father, Frederick Anderson, had hurled a volley of angry verbal abuse at Kiszko's mother outside the court, after her son was convicted. Anderson had also told the media that he would be outside the prison gates waiting for Kiszko should he ever be released.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Lesley_Molseed#Release_and_death

It’s absolutely understandable if JuJ did this, especially if alcohol played a part. Corrine didn’t deserve it but that’s beside the point.

It’s individuals attempts to paint JuJ as not having the human frailties that we all have that I don’t understand.

[William Wallace]

The new thread by UndertheSun.............very interesting.

Also check out the Twitter posts below.

[Nicholas]

I did say about 6 weeks ago that Stocky Man did the murder, that is correct.

Luke Mitchell committed the murder

Print in full what the SCCRC have said regarding ‘Stocky Man’

[Nicholas]

Luke Mitchell committed the murder

Print in full what the SCCRC have said regarding ‘Stocky Man’

The CCRC and SCCRC can and do get it wrong

They too can be and are affected by their own biases

[Nicholas]

Luke Mitchell committed the murder

Print in full what the SCCRC have said regarding ‘Stocky Man’

Can anyone post an excerpt to what Sandra Lean has written in her book about ‘stocky man’ and the SCCRC statement of reasons