Luke Mitchell - Witness Scott Forbes

[Mr Apples]

Did you read SF's transcript?
EDT:  I meant SK's transcript.  Sorry about the typo.

Yes. It was a bit of a train wreck, imo. I don't think, however, he had anything to do with Jodi's murder. Also, him and the other two from the search party (Janj & aw) changing their statements wasn't incriminating or sinister. SK had a sound alibi from his father Robert Kelly and his girlfriend at the time was Jodi's older sister (JanJ); JANJ and Jodi were close, so there is no way in hell that she would lie if SK had anything to do with her younger sister's murder. More importantly, JANJ & SK split up not long after the murder, and JANJ still alibis him in the present day -- otherwise she would have surely said something by now. I also understand that JANJ has been employed as a police officer for a few years now.

[Chris_Halkides]

Yes. It was a bit of a train wreck, imo. I don't think, however, he had anything to do with Jodi's murder. Also, him and the other two from the search party (Janj & aw) changing their statements wasn't incriminating or sinister. SK had a sound alibi from his father Robert Kelly and his girlfriend at the time was Jodi's older sister (JanJ); JANJ and Jodi were close, so there is no way in hell that she would lie if SK had anything to do with her younger sister's murder. More importantly, JANJ & SK split up not long after the murder, and JANJ still alibis him in the present day -- otherwise she would have surely said something by now. I also understand that JANJ has been employed as a police officer for a few years now.

There was a good deal he claimed that he could not remember.  However regarding Mia he said, "Obviously it was fresh in my mind when I gave my statement."  This stands in opposition to a major plank in the prosecution's case.

[Chris_Halkides]

duplicate post

[Mr Apples]

There was a good deal he claimed that he could not remember.  However regarding Mia he said, "Obviously it was fresh in my mind when I gave my statement."  This stands in opposition to a major plank in the prosecution's case.

But not once during any of the search trio's testimonies did they say that LM ever walked by that V-break in the wall. They were all consistent with their statements that LM had went straight to the V-break in the wall. Very significant.

[faithlilly]

Yes. It was a bit of a train wreck, imo. I don't think, however, he had anything to do with Jodi's murder. Also, him and the other two from the search party (Janj & aw) changing their statements wasn't incriminating or sinister. SK had a sound alibi from his father Robert Kelly and his girlfriend at the time was Jodi's older sister (JanJ); JANJ and Jodi were close, so there is no way in hell that she would lie if SK had anything to do with her younger sister's murder. More importantly, JANJ & SK split up not long after the murder, and JANJ still alibis him in the present day -- otherwise she would have surely said something by now. I also understand that JANJ has been employed as a police officer for a few years now.

I think a prison sentence would be enough of a deterrent to have stopped Janine Jones coming forward. How long do you think that she’d get for perjury not to mention the loss of her career? Think Angela Psaila who was jailed for perjury after giving false evidence at the Cardiff 3 trial.

[Parky41]

There was a good deal he claimed that he could not remember.  However regarding Mia he said, "Obviously it was fresh in my mind when I gave my statement."  This stands in opposition to a major plank in the prosecution's case.

Excellent, it is so refreshing to finally have that full acceptance that the dog was only and ever up against the wall, pulling to it, taken its master to it, directly to the V break from the east, after going to the Gino break as well of course.

Luke Mitchell was simply mistaken. "They" had not been some distance past, he had not returned to any break to enter the woods, his map was wrong, it was not them on the path with the victim directly over that wall. None of it happened. He entered that woodland exactly as was said by the others, we know they were always telling the truth, adopted the same truth at the trial.

So we have erased everything from Mitchell, we only and will always just have ' dog and wall' at the V break. So he climbs over that wall, he all but does not move, he has no view point, he has no idea the victims body is 43ft west of where he is, the dog had not alerted him to it, remember, no dog, no him, no they past that break in the wall, no only LM returning with dog to greet AW, none of that happened, only and always directly to the V break and over the wall.

So he is standing over that wall - Clearly just looking around him for those brief seconds, wondering to himself, what was Mia alerting to here? There is nothing here, It has to be something directly to the back of that V break, I mean not several feet in North. Not NE slightly a few feet. Then his magic torch picks up something, sees through greenery, overgrowth, and right through that "large oak tree" 40ft away. When he briefly changed directions as to where he was looking to see what Mia was alerting to from over 43ft away. Turned that torch W and bingo, what a torch that was.

So yes Chris, you are correct, We are still at this dog and wall fiasco. Bent and twisted, manipulated to hell and back, full circle, to having to say that everything that Luke Mitchell said was wrong. He was mistaken, it is only about the dog being up against that wall at the V break.

[Parky41]

But not once during any of the search trio's testimonies did they say that LM ever walked by that V-break in the wall. They were all consistent with their statements that LM had went straight to the V-break in the wall. Very significant.

Scraping and clawing, desperately trying to make it all fit somehow Mr Apples. Not when 'freshest in mind' to their testimony in court did they ever agree with LM's version of events. No timings, no accounts, absolutely nothing fitted with the cock and bull fairy story that Mitchell came out with. Desperately trying to explain why he knew where the body was. The BS of his dog alerting to where the body lay over that wall, where he had left that poor girls body hidden earlier in the evening. Of only him returning to the break to gain access whilst Kelly with Jaj's just kept on walking on.

JaJ's was correct in sticking to the absolute fact that LM had not been in hysterics.

[Parky41]

Scraping and clawing, desperately trying to make it all fit somehow Mr Apples. Not when 'freshest in mind' to their testimony in court did they ever agree with LM's version of events. No timings, no accounts, absolutely nothing fitted with the cock and bull fairy story that Mitchell came out with. Desperately trying to explain why he knew where the body was. The BS of his dog alerting to where the body lay over that wall, where he had left that poor girls body hidden earlier in the evening. Of only him returning to the break to gain access whilst Kelly with Jaj's just kept on walking on.

JaJ's was correct in sticking to the absolute fact that LM had not been in hysterics.

Once that scraping and clawing is complete to try and match the dog and wall to fit somehow, anyhow with LM's blatant lies. We can revert back to the magic torch again. Overloading the police with only that which the killer could know, such as that bobble. Excellent point made on X, of the victims position, facing up. He was without a  doubt relating information from earlier in the evening?

[faithlilly]

Scraping and clawing, desperately trying to make it all fit somehow Mr Apples. Not when 'freshest in mind' to their testimony in court did they ever agree with LM's version of events. No timings, no accounts, absolutely nothing fitted with the cock and bull fairy story that Mitchell came out with. Desperately trying to explain why he knew where the body was. The BS of his dog alerting to where the body lay over that wall, where he had left that poor girls body hidden earlier in the evening. Of only him returning to the break to gain access whilst Kelly with Jaj's just kept on walking on.

JaJ's was correct in sticking to the absolute fact that LM had not been in hysterics.

“ Everyone was in hysterics”

Isn’t that what Janine said in her statement?
It must have been because that’s the sentence Findlay read out to her in court.
She signed that statement as a true representation of what she had told the police. Nothing misconstrued and no misunderstanding as if there had been she would have asked the police to amend that statement.
She didn’t.

[Chris_Halkides]

Luke might have been mistaken about going past the wall, or he might be the biggest liar since Pinocchio, but it makes no difference.  IIUC SK's original statement included this sentence:  "The Dog was sniffing about and then pulling him mainly towards the right into the undergrowth at the wall."  Given that Mia led him to the wall, one of the prosecution's main planks is gone.

[KenMair]

Given that Mia led him to the wall, one of the prosecution's main planks is gone.

It would seem that the jury placed more credit in the dismantling of CM & SM's court testimonies about where LM claimed to be than supposition about possible minor inconsistencies from someone who had just found a dead body.

LM was not where he claimed to be and CM's court testimony in particular shows the extent of how much she would lie to protect him.

[Chris_Halkides]

Ken Mair,

You are mischaracterizing the importance of Mia's behavior and changing the subject, but OK.  The prosecution did not provide cell phone evidence that LM was not where he claimed, only testimony from AB, and the problems with her testimony are multifaceted.  My recollection is that SM said that he would sometimes access the internet even if other people were in the house, if he thought that they were not coming upstairs.  This contrasts with how his testimony is frequently represented.

[KenMair]

Ken Mair,

You are mischaracterizing the importance of Mia's behavior and changing the subject, but OK.  The prosecution did not provide cell phone evidence that LM was not where he claimed, only testimony from AB, and the problems with her testimony are multifaceted.  My recollection is that SM said that he would sometimes access the internet even if other people were in the house, if he thought that they were not coming upstairs.  This contrasts with how his testimony is frequently represented.

LM was witnessed at both ends of the path where his girlfriend's body was found. These sightings were accepted in court - no one else, other than LM, was ever traced or came forward as being that person. Can anyone now defend CM's testimony and the lengths she went to protect her son.

https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/12/corinne-mitchell-transcript-12012005.html

[Parky41]

Luke might have been mistaken about going past the wall, or he might be the biggest liar since Pinocchio, but it makes no difference.  IIUC SK's original statement included this sentence:  "The Dog was sniffing about and then pulling him mainly towards the right into the undergrowth at the wall."  Given that Mia led him to the wall, one of the prosecution's main planks is gone.

"It makes no difference -------" I think in all these years now of studying this case online, that statement goes right to the top of absolute belters Chris.

You have just said, who cares if LM was mistaken or lying, the fact the dog did pull to the wall proves the Crown case wrong with that third key.

The Crown case was that the dog did not alert Mitchell to whereabouts of the body which was bang on. His version of events did not happen. Nothing to do with that forever simplified, but the dog was at the wall, see! 

Ground hog day yet again. We just erase everything to do with Mitchell, we will re-write and explain it for him. - Nothing changes the absolute fact that the dog did no alert LM to the victims body. No dog, no him, no others where LM claimed that wonderous alert took place. But by all means erase it all out. And once you have finished with that you can re-write the rest for him too. - Hilarious.

[Parky41]

It would seem that the jury placed more credit in the dismantling of CM & SM's court testimonies about where LM claimed to be than supposition about possible minor inconsistencies from someone who had just found a dead body.

LM was not where he claimed to be and CM's court testimony in particular shows the extent of how much she would lie to protect him.

It would be that the Jury unlike Chris saw clearly that Luke Mitchells version of events did not take place. Hilarious yet again. Erasing and re-writing the case, to make it fit somehow, anyhow. 20yrs for lying his head off or being mistaken - Belter.