Luke Mitchell - Witness Scott Forbes

[KenMair]

Has anyone called him out on his claimed lawyer credentials... and if not, why not?

Yes I did ask him but was called a troll, jealous and disrespectful for daring to question his legal status. This is from somebody that publicly names innocent people as murderers. The legal profession must be laughing at him since he's not had another work experience position.

[faithlilly]

I think the hordes currently clamouring over Lean & Forbes on social media are in no way intellectually predisposed. GET THE LADDIE OOT NOO!!!! POLIS BASTURDS! WETHE PEOPLE DEMND A RE TRIAL. LET US ALL STAND UP FOR SCOTT ON THIS, etc.

Anyone putting an ounce of faith in what fantasist Forbes says needs their head examined but Ms Lean is smart in using him as her attack dog. I really think having him involved is doing more harm than good. Sign the petition…the killer’s still out there. Top class propaganda. Keep buying the books.

But what has that to do with me?

There seems to be one thread that ties  together all those who believe that Luke is guilty….their absolute loathing of Dr Lean and/or Scott Forbes. At times it’s almost visceral, not to mention in the case of Dr Lean deeply misogynistic.

[KenMair]

But what has that to do with me?

There seems to be one thread that ties  together all those who believe that Luke is guilty….their absolute loathing of Dr Lean and/or Scott Forbes. At times it’s almost visceral, not to mention in the case of Dr Lean deeply misogynistic.

You claimed the pro Mitchell group are intellectually predisposed to spotting MOJ. The above comments were a selection to claim intellect is perhaps in short supply.

I don't loathe Lean & Forbes but if someone accused me or a family member or a friend of murder of a child - which they have done to numerous people over 15 years - then I think loathing would be an understatement. It is shameful behaviour and nonsense that it's done in the name of justice.

[faithlilly]

You are doing it again Faith - That extensive book of photographs inclusive of Mitchells bomber, not that picked by F&W, just the parka Faith. AB, this fishing style coat, possibly a collar, did NOT pick those coats with collars, she picked that parka, it was the only one out of them all that resembled closest to her memory recall.

This describing the best way to kill someone comes with a clear thought process. Bringing that time forward of a meeting does not change any element of pre-meditation Faith, it only alters the time of the happening. In turn he attempted to use this to advantage by claiming no meeting was arranged until those texts - Nonsense.

Those phone records, pop them up now. That meeting without a doubt had been put in place from school whilst her phone was broken. Any contact made around alterations of what had already been set. The only person she needed to contact and did was Mitchell.

When you look at something, a convicted killer, one does not see some sweet little boy at all. For goodness sake, those questions, and I do wonder how the hell we have serial killers, it is because most are in plain sight Faith, they do not have massive arrows held above them with a warning sign attached. Thankfully this one in the making has not been able to kill again, thankfully some are caught first time.

So we are back to those three people who all identified Mitchell on either side of that murder sight. Not one person to place him anywhere else. Who was not wearing that bomber jacket but that khaki army style coat. Then the two people as he tried to exit that woodland back on to that road. And no, we do not move this sighting to where suits. We only apply that Mitchell denied full on that this was him, that he had NOT been where the people saw him, denying that it was him full stop. These two people most definitely did pick that bomber with the orange lining from that book Faith. Mitchell as was shown in court, was only then making his way down to the entrance, to place himself in that 'intentional' window of opportunity to be seen.

I see the new narrative is that Mitchell kept popping off the road out of sight to have a smoke, repeatedly, reason as to why he was not seen! That really tops a lot of the utter BS. Mitchell, popping out of sight to have a smoke, as bloody if! The boy who sparked up in front of the cops, allowed to smoke in front of his mother. Surely we are not talking joints here? Who again, on that quiet stretch of road with little pedestrians would not be popping out of sight at all. But even at that, just how many joints was that 14yr old having Faith, the boy, who Lean lied for years had NOT been smoking drugs, that he had NO drugs in his system - Rotten to the core with utter BS.

And I’m afraid that you are doing it again Parky…claiming knowledge that you do not have….we used to call it making it up as you went along. I suppose that’s why you keep dodging the questions about provenance put to you by myself and Mr Apples…a secret group that only you have access to…pull the other one. Luke was on RDP using his phone at 17.40, putting it down so Judith didn’t hear the motorbike…why…..but then again he was leisurely standing at a gate at 17.40 to be seen by the intrepid duo Walsh and Fleming. Which one was it Parky….or is it a case of when the circumstances change so do the facts?

And the nonsense about Jodi being grounded but being allowed out after her chores, absolute nonsense. Your problem though was trying to explain Judith’s testimony that Jodi was grounded on the night she died and the grounding had only been lifted after she arrived home from school. It was a full grounding, no chores exception clause….but of course there just had to be a plan to meet or your theory wouldn’t work…problem was that there wasn’t and all the witnesses, even Jodi’s mum, agreed on this.

As to expertise in who is and isn’t a killer…I think I’ll listen to the FBI.

Further of course Luke denied that Walsh and Fleming saw him at that gate….he wasn’t there. He had never walked that far. The sil had done what they had did with the jogger and placed him at the wrong place. How much police coercion this took, if any, heaven alone knows.

[faithlilly]

You claimed the pro Mitchell group are intellectually predisposed to spotting MOJ. The above comments were a selection to claim intellect is perhaps in short supply.

I don't loathe Lean & Forbes but if someone accused me or a family member or a friend of murder of a child - which they have done to numerous people over 15 years - then I think loathing would be an understatement. It is shameful behaviour and nonsense that it's done in the name of justice.

No I referred solely to myself and Dr Lean. You misinterpreted my comment.

On your second comment I tend to agree although many of the individuals posting hateful comments have no connection to any of the alleged perpetrators.

[Parky41]

And I’m afraid that you are doing it again Parky…claiming knowledge that you do not have….we used to call it making it up as you went along. I suppose that’s why you keep dodging the questions about provenance put to you by myself and Mr Apples…a secret group that only you have access to…pull the other one. Luke was on RDP using his phone at 17.40, putting it down so Judith didn’t hear the motorbike…why…..but then again he was leisurely standing at a gate at 17.40 to be seen by the intrepid duo Walsh and Fleming. Which one was it Parky….or is it a case of when the circumstances change so do the facts?

And the nonsense about Jodi being grounded but being allowed out after her chores, absolute nonsense. Your problem though was trying to explain Judith’s testimony that Jodi was grounded on the night she died and the grounding had only been lifted after she arrived home from school. It was a full grounding, no chores exception clause….but of course there just had to be a plan to meet or your theory wouldn’t work…problem was that there wasn’t and all the witnesses, even Jodi’s mum, agreed on this.

As to expertise in who is and isn’t a killer…I think I’ll listen to the FBI.

Further of course Luke denied that Walsh and Fleming saw him at that gate….he wasn’t there. He had never walked that far. The sil had done what they had did with the jogger and placed him at the wrong place. How much police coercion this took, if any, heaven alone knows.

Behave with this nonsense of constantly misrepresenting what I have always said - Fellow students studying in a group PRIVATE to us. Not for any old Tom, Dick or Harry to be joining in with. To that trial, a courtroom jam packed with many people inclusive of students, journalists, general spectators, legal bodies from all walks, the Jury, the Judge, family, friends and on it goes. And from that you can pick whomever and as many as you like, it makes not a blind bit of difference to the truth, does it now dear. To that passage of time and people are not mute! To the absolute fact I am from that area, again, I have stated that I had stayed in Newtongrange.

And again, that bike coming back down that path at the same time he had instantly hung up on a call. Mitchell, who made an attempt to place himself home until 5:40pm, believing that call had not logged, omitting any call until faced with that information, did he not?

To this claimed massive police coercion from that very dim police force - Have a word. At the gate, taken to that gate by F&W, from saying the sighting had been near to the Abbey, those seconds apart in a car. As was your jogger one keeps harping on about dear, not there one second and there the next. From seeing Mitchell at that low wooden gate to then seeing the jogger. To that book of photographs and Mitchell NOT wearing his bomber with orange lining, choosing that parka as the coat he had been wearing. To then being changed and denying that it was him the next couple saw as he attempted to exit that woodland.

So, this mangling of five people who saw Mitchell, scraping and clawing to rearrange everything to suit. To there being absolutely NO confirmed sightings of Jodi Jones that day around 5pm walking to meet with Mitchell. Again the bollocks applied around this mystery man nonsense. Deflected from reality, that IF there had been any confirmed sighting of that girl walking along that road, towards that path, it would have been used without any doubt at all, to show her last movements before meeting with her boyfriend.

[faithlilly]

Behave with this nonsense of constantly misrepresenting what I have always said - Fellow students studying in a group PRIVATE to us. Not for any old Tom, Dick or Harry to be joining in with. To that trial, a courtroom jam packed with many people inclusive of students, journalists, general spectators, legal bodies from all walks, the Jury, the Judge, family, friends and on it goes. And from that you can pick whomever and as many as you like, it makes not a blind bit of difference to the truth, does it now dear. To that passage of time and people are not mute! To the absolute fact I am from that area, again, I have stated that I had stayed in Newtongrange.

And again, that bike coming back down that path at the same time he had instantly hung up on a call. Mitchell, who made an attempt to place himself home until 5:40pm, believing that call had not logged, omitting any call until faced with that information, did he not?

To this claimed massive police coercion from that very dim police force - Have a word. At the gate, taken to that gate by F&W, from saying the sighting had been near to the Abbey, those seconds apart in a car. As was your jogger one keeps harping on about dear, not there one second and there the next. From seeing Mitchell at that low wooden gate to then seeing the jogger. To that book of photographs and Mitchell NOT wearing his bomber with orange lining, choosing that parka as the coat he had been wearing. To then being changed and denying that it was him the next couple saw as he attempted to exit that woodland.

So, this mangling of five people who saw Mitchell, scraping and clawing to rearrange everything to suit. To there being absolutely NO confirmed sightings of Jodi Jones that day around 5pm walking to meet with Mitchell. Again the bollocks applied around this mystery man nonsense. Deflected from reality, that IF there had been any confirmed sighting of that girl walking along that road, towards that path, it would have been used without any doubt at all, to show her last movements before meeting with her boyfriend.

No misrepresentation here Parky. Your parlour tricks have been called out for exactly what they are. What puzzles me is why you’d go to such length to fabricate so much of what you post. What is in it for you? Indeed you may be from the local area and so might I….who’s to say? What that does not prove is the veracity of virtually all of the verbatim statements you attempt to pass off as truth. Did you spend each and every day in court…thought not. Do you have a verbatim transcript of all the witness evidence….thought not. Half of what you post has been picked up over the years on forums such as this….a sprinkling of truth in a morass of gossip, innuendo and downright lies. The other half you simply make up on the hoof as the discussion dictates. All those individuals who have been involved, according to you, in the case yet only you have heard their voices….okkkaaaayyyy. You have a receptive audience, I’ll give you that but in the real world, you know the place where people require proof, you will continue to be called out on those fabrications.

I am truly at a loss to understand your second paragraph. Are there no motorbikes going up and down Newbattle Abbey Crescent? Why would Luke hang up the phone because of the noise of a distant bike? Absolute tosh.

Again that second guessing of witnesses…of the jogger saying that she was not where Fleming and Walsh said she was at the time they claimed. For her ‘just to have passed the youth’ they saw Luke would have to have been some
what further up Newbattle Road than they claimed. Further where Fleming and Walsh shown a compilation of photos of jackets? They certainly don’t mention it….Bryson did…and it was certainly not mentioned in court. What they did mention was the jacket may have been ‘waterproof’ and anyone who has seen a photograph of the actual jacket Luke was wearing…that shiny bomber jacket…would concur with that description. Why you are trying to give credibility to a pair of woman who were shown to be dishonest in court and while they were under oath, again, only you know.

This mystery man nonsense? In the middle of July the media carried an appeal from the police regarding a man seen following Jodi on the Easthouses Road sometime after 1700 on the 30th of June. The police described it as the ‘first credible sighting of Jodi”.

[KenMair]

There's been a lot of debate recently on timings and sightings and also a lot of suspect naming/shaming from Forbes in his recent podcast. For all the finger pointing and smearing of most of the Jones extended family and associates, has his extensive criminal past ever been discussed in relation to a predjudice against the criminal justice system?

Have Lean & Forbes ever discussed Mitchell's numerous knife threats to a number of girls from the age of 12 and being referred to an educational psychologist? From one media article he allegedy said "move and I'll gut you". Surely this calls for a podcast from Inspector Forbes in the interests of transparancy rather than pondering over why two daft lads scrapped a moped.

[faithlilly]

There's been a lot of debate recently on timings and sightings and also a lot of suspect naming/shaming from Forbes in his recent podcast. For all the finger pointing and smearing of most of the Jones extended family and associates, has his extensive criminal past ever been discussed in relation to a predjudice against the criminal justice system?

Have Lean & Forbes ever discussed Mitchell's numerous knife threats to a number of girls from the age of 12 and being referred to an educational psychologist? From one media article he allegedy said "move and I'll gut you". Surely this calls for a podcast from Inspector Forbes in the interests of transparancy rather than pondering over why two daft lads scrapped a moped.

How many of the girls who said that they were threatened by Luke with a knife were called by the prosecution?  Not one and you have to ask yourself why that was when their testimony would have shown previous violent conduct. Ask yourself why these stories only came out after Luke’s conviction and when the tabloids were offering substantial money to anyone with a story about Luke, the more sensational the better.

As to Luke being referred to an educational psychologist, wasn’t Jodi too? Why do you think that that’s significant?

[KenMair]

Having had a close female friend involved in a criminal case about male violence I think I have a fair understanding in why females don't come forward to be interrogated on the stand. God forbid "she was wearing a short skirt/top and was asking for it". There were at least 3 girls who claimed Mitchell threatened them with a knife, he carried a knife daily and spoke to friends about killing someone, aged 14, but Lean & Forbes focus on daft lads on a moped, someone with a scratch on their face or the victim's brother. How would you feel if it was your sister?

[faithlilly]

Having had a close female friend involved in a criminal case about male violence I think I have a fair understanding in why females don't come forward to be interrogated on the stand. God forbid "she was wearing a short skirt/top and was asking for it". There were at least 3 girls who claimed Mitchell threatened them with a knife, he carried a knife daily and spoke to friends about killing someone, aged 14, but Lean & Forbes focus on daft lads on a moped, someone with a scratch on their face or the victim's brother. How would you feel if it was your sister?

If she was my sister? I’d be apoplectic with rage but then I’ve never subscribed to the school of thought which says that to prove Luke innocent you must suggest another protagonist.

Further I think many of us have friends who have been victims of both male violence and the system on which they relied for justice but that’s not we’re talking about here….I’m afraid you’re comparing oranges and apples. The women you are talking about are adults…the victims of the alleged knife attacks were children. What would they know, or care,  of the treatment of women at the hands of our justice system? Are you truly suggesting that the girls wouldn’t have told their parents or another adult if such an assault had taken place? That they’d be afraid of being accused of somehow of ‘encouraging’ their attacker?

And 3 incidents and, coincidentally, not one of the victims told the police, or their parents it would appear even when Luke was under lock and key and couldn’t harm them. Nothing…nada…zilch until the opening of those tabloid chequebooks after the trial.

[KenMair]

Who knows why the girls didn't report the knife attacks but it's verging on victim blaming which the Lean camp have years of form with. Have you ever once thought that you might be supporting an evil murderer who was correctly dealt with and there is no MOJ.

19 years, numerous appeals, books, petitions and podcasts all no further forward than day one. The public/real life support of no more than a few dozen people at the petition handover probaby sums it up best. Were you there?

[faithlilly]

Who knows why the girls didn't report the knife attacks but it's verging on victim blaming which the Lean camp have years of form with. Have you ever once thought that you might be supporting an evil murderer who was correctly dealt with and there is no MOJ.

19 years, numerous appeals, books, petitions and podcasts all no further forward than day one. The public/real life support of no more than a few dozen people at the petition handover probaby sums it up best. Were you there?

It’s not victim blaming if the girls were never victims at all. Why do you think that these girls would talk to the newspapers for a fee but not the police? Why do you think that they’d reveal all at a price but not help to put away, if their tales of violence are true, a violent individual?

Further do you think you might be able to debate the facts of the case without bringing Dr Lean’s name into every post? I think you said some weeks ago, and correct me if I’m wrong, that you were studying criminology but the personal nature of your comments towards Dr Lean suggests to me that you may find it difficult to be impartial in your work, if you qualify.

Was I at the handing over of the petition….no as I don’t think petitions take us any further forward, only new evidence will do that. It does prove however that those who did attend are not the sum total of individuals who support Luke.

[KenMair]

It’s not victim blaming if the girls were never victims at all. Why do you think that these girls would talk to the newspapers for a fee but not the police? Why do you think that they’d reveal all at a price but not help to put away, if their tales of violence are true, a violent individual?

Further do you think you might be able to debate the facts of the case without bringing Dr Lean’s name into every post? I think you said some weeks ago, and correct me if I’m wrong, that you were studying criminology but the personal nature of your comments towards Dr Lean suggests to me that you may find it difficult to be impartial in your work, if you qualify.

Your first remark probably says enough about you. For the record, I studied Criminology as part of my degree some years back but was not my main subject. I have nothing personal against Ms Lean/your mum/friend, but do not accept her dangerous and devious approach in defending a convicted child killer in the name of justice for [Name removed] while implicating the wider family and various others over the years while ignoring LM's obvious negative character traits.

[faithlilly]

Your first remark probably says enough about you. For the record, I studied Criminology as part of my degree some years back but was not my main subject. I have nothing personal against Ms Lean/your mum/friend, but do not accept her dangerous and devious approach in defending a convicted child killer in the name of justice for [Name removed] while implicating the wider family and various others over the years while ignoring LM's obvious negative character traits.

“ Witchdoctor Lean”…forgive me but it seems pretty personal to me. As to implicating individuals I’ve read quite a few of your posts suggesting Shane Mitchell was possibly more deeply implicated in Jodi’s murder than was revealed in the court case. This is an individual who hasn’t been convicted of a single offence in connection to this case. The hypocrisy is stunning.

Of course your behaviour towards Dr Lean in cases like this is nothing new. Chris Mullin, the MP who wrote the seminal tome on the miscarriage of justice perpetrated against the Birmingham Six received similar abuse from those angry not with those who had fed them a sea of lies but the individual who had revealed their gullibility. Of course in the end Mr Mullins was completely vindicated and six men whose lives had been savagely stolen from them walked free, after three appeals, from the Court of Appeal. We can only hope the same for Luke.