This shows how evidence can be distorted.
Mitchell was far from normal. He had a warped predisposition towards knives and had actually assaulted one school girl with them just days before he killed Jodi Jones. He was reprimanded by Matthew Muraska, who helped run the local Army Cadet Force The Army Cadet Force (ACF). Asked about an incident with Mitchell, Mr Muraska said it had been in the summer of 2002 that he caught him with a knife.
"They were on parade at the end of the evening and I saw one cadet pass something to Luke. I asked Luke, 'What is that?' He removed the knife from his pocket and handed it to me.
"I opened the knife. It was about six or seven inches long, a lock- type knife with a pointed blade," said Mr Muraska. "I held it up so all the cadets could see. I said that I never, ever wanted to see a knife like that in the Army Cadet Force...there was no place for a knife like that...a knife such as that was made for one purpose and one purpose only.
"A young cadet said, 'Killing' and I said, 'Yes, exactly.' I said I doubted the legality of such a knife and that carrying such a knife was probably totally illegal."
Mr Muraska said he had to give back the knife to Mitchell. In the past, knives would be confiscated and destroyed, but a policeman had pointed out that such action was theft.
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-13056511.htmlLuke was handed the knife, it’s obvious from the article that there’s no evidence that it was his to begin with. Does this prove that knife carrying among Luke’s peer group was common? Was Mr Muraska called to give evidence in court ?
ETA It seems Mr Muraska did give evidence but to what....Luke being given a knife? Further it makes it all the more strange that the girl allegedly attacked at the platoon meeting wasn’t called to the stand.
