I have doubts over the safety of Luke’s conviction much the same as I have had with numerous other convicted individuals, many of whom have had their sentences quashed after multiple appeals. Those doubts are shared by multiple experts in different but connected disciplines within the legal field who have made their voices heard over many years.
While I am not for one moment suggesting that there is definite proof of any other individuals having committed Jodi’s murder if you, as you do, put store in ‘character traits’ to signify guilt there must be much about the behaviour of certain individuals surrounding the family in the preceding weeks that gives you pause?
Mmmmmm, let me think about that - Two liars who take a fragment of truth and build it into something false do so across the board, so what exactly is questionable about members of that girls family in the weeks before the murder, let us think about that dear?
You can only mean the brother, it is the one person who's behaviour is mentioned in the weeks prior to the murder, now let us examine why these enablers know this information (the truthful version and not the fantasy and lies of course). It is in the statements obtained in the investigation, medical records to back up the statements, which equated to honesty dear, they had been fully open, disclosing everything. Other statements taken from other people to back up further information given over in an instant by that girls family.
Again, a luxury that cannot be afforded the Mitchells dear, who were the complete opposite of being honest, ever. So we have these two sides created by you. One, 100% honest around everything, the other the opposite. - Which really is the crux of it all, something that certainly and repeatedly sticks in your craw dear, as you scrape at mimicking your ego to try and find some form of dishonesty = Zero, so you simply manipulate and scrape and of course lie dear.
So, the girls family in their honesty dear, who had lost their daughter, sister, niece and so forth - Have two shady characters using them as a weapon, with dishonesty dear, to gain favour for a compulsive liar and his lying mother. Who, in the pits of all they scrape at are lying around the victim in this case, repeatedly. Then we add who they are acting for and on behalf of dear, which is her killer.
Which dear has absolutely NOTHING to do with any expert who has giving opinion around certain areas in law, or any other, around what is only a very slim 'possibility' of an unsafe conviction and not factual innocence dear.
So, and again, these others who were fully investigated, the very reason why all this wonderful information (the truthful version) is there, all known about and eliminated as having any involvement in that young girls death.
Where you, dripping with drools dear - Say on repeat you do not need to use anyone else to try and show Mitchell as innocent, yet on the next drool you keep on attacking that girls family dear, with those scrapings to try and find anything at all of dishonesty dear. And there is nothing there, bar having to actually lie about them - Have a word, you my dear are a disgrace to all things moral. Where you have shown repeatedly that the only thing you apply to truth is that it is a word containing five letters.
So, you very much do back, fully, EVERYTHING that is being done by enablers of a convicted killer dear, every lie, every fabrication, every wrongful accusation on repeat against multiple innocent people. Because you back fully that due to there being NOTHING to prove that killer innocent, any tactic will do to gain support for him, even using the victim herself by lying about her. - Behave.
