Not impossible, but, IMO, very unlikely!
Isn't it for most everyone, It Is not easy to fathom at all is it? Of anyone carrying out such a horrendous act. Good to see, you are completely leaning towards a fully grown, adult serial killer type. That in no way do you believe in the slightest, that the 16-year old youths on the bike, the 18-year old Kelly, the 19-year old brother had any part whatsoever in this horrendous murder either, do you? That the 15 -year old you speak of is no different from those others, where age, experience and cover up and all else come into play? Unlikely, isn't it? Their parents, siblings and all else would cover up either, would they?
But the reality here is of course the false alibi. And the lies being told around this. Where it is pretty much key to understand the extent of the lies told, that gives us that clear picture, that LM was not at home. It has nothing to do with what can possibly be done in 13 mins, but everything to do with, what was in reality claimed to have happened in and around 40-45 mins. At it's very basic, If everything was in truth around Mitchell being home, then why that need to strive to make it into something else, to pull the brother into it? To extend that time out, to have him covered at home, longer? In advance, and exactly around the time needed. They were the only ones, to strive to put an alibi in place, that is what stands out. And if one is striving to give an alibi, it is because they needed one. - That is common sense and logic, is it not?
The first time SM was spoken to , was not the "first statement at the station". A brief account had already been given to the FLO, after being appointed to the Mitchell household. Within 36hrs of this girls death. A more detailed one on the Thursday, within 72hrs of this girls death, and a further brief one, still within 72hrs. When it became abundantly clear that on his arrival home, his mother had given a further account, and she put SM centre in those lies. And we know they were lies, and not memory loss - for she had her son coming out his room, downstairs on her arrival home at five past five. She had him return to his room for around 10mins while dinner was being completed. That he collected that dinner at around 5.15, ate it and she claims he left the house. She did not see him just after five, and she neither saw nor heard him leave home. So by her own claims again, she had no way of knowing what time he left, did she? And those first accounts, all included LM leaving home around 5.45pm, to go meet with Jodi for around 6pm. Her memory loss, and regaining it, already had her memory put SM somewhere he could not have been, for she was not even home. And he could not have waited to have dinner made, to then eat it and be out - for he had to be out before 5.30pm for him still not to see his brother. - Now if you feel, due to not believing a 14-year old could carry out this type of crime, that they must be telling the truth about the alibi - then it is hardly surprising one puts complete faith in Ms Leans version on the back of the Mitchells?
Memory - every single detail of that dinner, with those clear and precise descriptions of Luke, all centred around Luke, driving that point that he was home. This is from the off. The clothing, of everything he was wearing, again driving that point home, those precise details of what he had on. Those timings, again precise, driving the point home, that she seen him just after 5pm, that he stayed home until around 5.45pm. Of putting herself in the back garden, again the detail of her work and all else. Putting her outside, when most would be in? It was overcast and wet. Low temps. It stood out like a sore thumb in comparison to these others, did it not? That precision, yet forgot she had not went directly home? That she even had an imaginary discussion with her other son at a time she could not have. - So yes it was blatant, and yes it disintegrated - he was not at home.
So, she was covering for him, at a time he obviously needed cover for. And she dragged her other son into it, to get one to lie to cover for the other also. From the moment she decided to help LM, irrespective of what tale he told her, she set herself on a road of no return. Only CM or her son/s can answer why, to what story was told by Luke to them. People again under the impression that this maniac had arrived home, dripping blood and all else, the person who murdered Jodi Jones, those injuries, was not simply a murderer, where they? - And I do believe, whatever help he managed to get, he threw it back in her face. For the moment he crossed that threshold from fantasy to reality, something else was born. That change, and this was the person who needed to be at the centre of the action later that evening. There is no rational to that type of mind, no logic and common sense of distancing oneself completely, is there? The person who murdered Jodi Jones, was cold and they were calculated - exactly the traits LM displayed throughout. Every meet, every interview, through the trial and present day. - That complete "flat affect" monotone voice. Exactly how the operator described him, "not how one would expect someone to be, after finding a body" Exactly the voice the Jury heard that day, that chilling voice.
Is this the basis of what sucked Ms Lean in? For instantly upon that murder happening she had LM as being innocent, didn't she? That controversy, whilst her friends were saying I wonder, she was saying I don't. It was not him. Confirmed by that hand shake, he looked her in the eye, and she decided he was innocent. - And people have to believe her wonderful judgement of character, based on what exactly? - for it is certainly not evidence.
So, the question should be, should it not, why did she lie for him, and why did she involve her other son? Look at it this way. IF he had been home on her arrival, then she saw him for mere minutes. You can not make a mistake with seeing someone for mere minutes, can you? So why not simply say this? in the first instance. Tell the truth, as with Luke and wanting him over the wall for his DNA, as with his mother on Newbattle Road, "Jodi dead, breathing attack, is he under arrest" - She knew before having contact with her son that evening, that Jodi was dead. They had not spoken on the phone, he had been ignoring her.
So, not the fault of the police, is it? - They did not concoct the stories, lie to cover up, whatever they thought it was, they were covering for? Even that disgusting attempt to embroil SM into it, only sealed that fate more, they were digging the hole bigger. Adding more and more prior to the CCTV footage and the phone logs. And the arrest and the charges, and the future? Where we are asked to believe, that his grown up son, simply left this mother to it, by her blessing! - not much choice really, but it certainly tells it's own story, does it not?
