I came across this post tonight by Corinne Mitchell and thought it worth reposting where it might at least be read by some people.Ive just had my accountant in to pick up my accounts as it is VAT season...... :'(..........as usual he asked about Luke and how his case was coming along and told me he had seen Sandra and myself in the paper.....which he found spooky as he doesn't,as a rule buy that particular paper, and asked....what happens now.?
We got talking about police, lawyers and jurors in general and discussed how corrupt the police and the law were and how the jurors relied on these bodies to actually be truthful as at the end of the day it is their decision that affects the accused.
He admitted he was shocked, though indeed never really gave a second thought, how police and lawyers use words to simply "dupe" the jurors. I explained to him they used psychology for this..............he looked at me strangely and said.....like what....give me an example.
The police reported that Luke had "concealed" trousers in his hold~all........The trousers were "in" his hold~all...a hold~all used to go to his fathers every weekend and like all teenagers, never emptied from one week to the next (the trousers were taken to be tested and ofcourse, there was nothing on them except the usual from being worn).....if you use the word "concealed" to a jury it is going to make them think........oh! concealed eh?.....that's sinister, where if they were just told "in"....they would think...ok....and?
The police reported that I was "caught" on CCTV., again, put the word "caught" to a jury and it's going to make them think.......she was "caught"........that's not sounding so good for her is it? whereas if they had been told "seen"....they would think......ok she was seen. well at least it is proof she was at X at a certain time when she said she was......so she couldn't possibly have been at Y.!
My accountant shook his head and admitted he hadn't given it a second thought about how one word could completely change the context of something and what devastating results come with it.......................it just got me thinking how many people are of that same thought........I know, before all this began......I too, was one of these people.......I never thought for one moment that psychology would be used on a jury and they get away with it as they are not "technically" lying.....just using a small change of word!http://forum.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk/series-on-cases-from-sandra-leans-book-no-smoke/luke-mitchell-wrongly-convicted-of-murder/msg9922336/#msg9922336
Those stories always go down a treat Corinne!
I bet you didn't tell him that Luke is serving a sentence because your eldest son Shane has a bad memory!