Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton (WAP) exit from Luke Mitchell case!

[Parky41]

[quote “You are one f*cking sick little bitch. How long did you think folk were going to take your lies and p*sh? Weren’t happy destroying one family’s life, eh? Now you’ve started on somebody else’s. How many more you twisted little f*ck? Yours is coming, don’t you worry about it. You’ll get yours you twisted little c**t – there’s plenty just waiting their chance.”][/quote]


Confused? Only after this attack ( If it did happen?), then decided to oblige?

[Nicholas]

Becoming blinded, pushing the obvious so far back, even the basics are forgotten. Yet, still searching for other avenues in desperation of proof of ones own theory. A long road indeed.

And as clear as the identity of “the emperor” over on blue

“The Emperor's New Clothes" (Danish: Kejserens nye klæder) is a short tale written by Danish author Hans Christian Andersen, about two weavers who promise an emperor a new suit of clothes that they say is invisible to those who are unfit for their positions, stupid, or incompetent – while in reality, they make no clothes at all, making everyone believe the clothes are invisible to them.

[Nicholas]

“A true truth-seeker doesn't have a predefined goal as to what type of information he wants to find. He's weary of the trap of cherry-picking information that shows what one wants to be true, as opposed to what is actually true.

http://darwinian-medicine.com/are-you-a-truth-seeker/

Becoming blinded, pushing the obvious so far back, even the basics are forgotten. Yet, still searching for other avenues in desperation of proof of ones own theory. A long road indeed.

“A true truth-seeker doesn’t have a predefined goal as to what type of information he wants to find. He’s weary of the trap of cherry-picking information that shows what one wants to be true, as opposed to what is actually true. He has an open mind and doesn’t neglect or overlook information simply because it goes against what he prefers to be true or what he’s heard from others is true. He accepts real truths, regardless of whether they are inconvenient or not and doesn’t steer clear of unpopular and/or ridiculed truths.

“I strive to be a truth-seeker. I don’t claim that I don’t let public opinions and trends affect me at all or that I’ve always managed to stay true to the truth; however, over the years, I’ve tried to learn from my mistakes and hone my truth-seeking skills.

[Nicholas]

Becoming blinded, pushing the obvious so far back, even the basics are forgotten. Yet, still searching for other avenues in desperation of proof of ones own theory. A long road indeed.

January 2017
Sandra Lean stated here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg383384.html#msg383384
“What causes people to become "criminals?" We stopped looking at that a long time ago, and are happy now just to blame. Surely, though, it would be better to avoid or prevent criminality in the first place? My original hope had been to work with young offenders in the field of rehabilitation, however, life had a different plan for me.

Whether we like it or not, the vast majority of people serving prison sentences are going to be returned to our communities - wouldn't it make more sense to have them return as functioning, contributing members of those communities, able to create positive and meaningful lives for themselves, rather than have them return brutalised, mentally destroyed by drugs far more freely available in prisons than elsewhere? In order to do that, we'd have to understand what made them offend in the first place.

How amateur and 3 1/2 years behind!?!

“Whether we like it or not, the vast majority of people serving prison sentences are going to be returned to our communities”

Completely lacking in insight

Simon Hall was shipped back to closed prison conditions due to his risk factors having changed AND the prisons concerns he could escape and make his way home - to me.

[Nicholas]

Confused? Only after this attack ( If it did happen?), then decided to oblige?

She joined twitter in October 2018 and “the emperor” still “follows” her

[Parky41]

She joined twitter in October 2018 and “the emperor” still “follows” her

I know.

[Nicholas]

[quote “You are one f*cking sick little bitch. How long did you think folk were going to take your lies and p*sh? Weren’t happy destroying one family’s life, eh? Now you’ve started on somebody else’s. How many more you twisted little f*ck? Yours is coming, don’t you worry about it. You’ll get yours you twisted little c**t – there’s plenty just waiting their chance.”][/quote]

Confused? Only after this attack ( If it did happen?), then decided to oblige?

The above could have been sent as a message for all we know as opposed to dialogue from someone in a shop?

[Parky41]

January 2017
Sandra Lean stated here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg383384.html#msg383384
“What causes people to become "criminals?" We stopped looking at that a long time ago, and are happy now just to blame. Surely, though, it would be better to avoid or prevent criminality in the first place? My original hope had been to work with young offenders in the field of rehabilitation, however, life had a different plan for me.

Whether we like it or not, the vast majority of people serving prison sentences are going to be returned to our communities - wouldn't it make more sense to have them return as functioning, contributing members of those communities, able to create positive and meaningful lives for themselves, rather than have them return brutalised, mentally destroyed by drugs far more freely available in prisons than elsewhere? In order to do that, we'd have to understand what made them offend in the first place.

How amateur and 3 1/2 years behind!?!

“Whether we like it or not, the vast majority of people serving prison sentences are going to be returned to our communities”

Completely lacking in insight

Simon Hall was shipped back to closed prison conditions due to his risk factors having changed AND the prisons concerns he could escape and make his way home - to me.

Through the transparency of misinformation, it has entered my head, that there may be an unlterior motive, by gaining trust/closeness in the convicted - a means to study them?

[Nicholas]

Through the transparency of misinformation, it has entered my head, that there may be an unlterior motive, by gaining trust/closeness in the convicted - a means to study them?

Do you mean gather information from the vulnerable family members of the convicted as a means to attempt to study their cases in order to help Mitchell’s, in turn helping herself?

[Nicholas]

Confused? Only after this attack ( If it did happen?), then decided to oblige?

Crazy making behaviour designed to distort the intended targets reality and those who read it - the double-edged sword again

Crazymaking is when a person sets you up to lose, as in the examples above: You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t. You’re put in lose-lose situations, but too many games are being played for you to reason yourself out of it. There is no rhyme, reason, or emotional understanding with a crazy-maker. Worse, when the behavior is stealthy and confusing, it becomes easy to feel crazy. It feels like you’re caught in a whirlwind of chaos, with the life force being sucked from you as you are manipulated with nonstop crazy-making tactics. https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/counseling-keys/201403/how-handle-crazymaker

[Nicholas]

I know.

And vice versa

[Nicholas]

Through the transparency of misinformation, it has entered my head, that there may be an unlterior motive, by gaining trust/closeness in the convicted - a means to study them?

For comparison? Does she recognise something in them?

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean
Jul 18, 2012#228
“Thank you Chelsea Marie and Nugnug.

I'm now into my tenth year of the learning process that is involved with fighting injustice, and I'm very well aware there is still so much to learn.

None of us has the "answers" - I believe most people do the best they can, with the best of intentions - I dont think any of us know, when we first start out, what we are getting into, or what it will involve - the desire to try to help right some terrible wrongs is what I believe we all have in common.

The personal attacks and divisions are very sad - they direct attention away from what really matters, dilute the strength that could be built by everyone working together, and, in my opinion, they scare people off who might otherwise become involved.


Sandra Lean
Jul 20, 2012#231
Chelsea Marie and Kircaldy, I am currently working on two further books - I hope to have the first published before the end of this year, the other will be sometime next year.

These are difficult books to write - it is not just the facts of the individual cases, and the flaws in the system which need to be highlighted - the agony of those involved is an ever present consideration, whether it's the pain of the wrongly accused and convicted and their families, or the suffering of those who have lost loved ones to terrible crimes.

That doesn't mean, of course, that the books should not be written, but the depth of involvement required to write them in ways which take into consideration the emotional trauma of all involved takes its own toll. Thank you both for your comments.
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/shirleymckie/luke-mitchell-appeal-and-media-links-t662-s220.html

What has Sandra Lean learned?


"After Billy was arrested I sent this email to his parents. I also sent a copy to Sandra Lean, to try and confirm that I was telling the truth.

Flag this message
Re: Please note amended address
Tuesday, 11 November, 2008 9:48
From:
"MARINA THOMASON"
Add sender to Contacts
To:
"Harriets Mail"
Dear Harriet and Jim,

We've got your e-mail and we will pin the address up in the canteen at work.  I'm sure one or two of the workers will want to write to Billy.  This is a very difficult letter for me to write to you and I've struggled with my conscious whether I should or not.

During the time of Billy and Kareens wedding you were very good to us and you made me feel very welcome in your home, I felt you Harriet and me especially, clicked.  You are a nice family.  But the truth of the matter is we advised Billy and Kareen to pospone their wedding.  I took Kareen aside and Christopher took Billy and advised them to put the wedding off.  We did this because we knew the extent of the problems they had in their relationship and feared it would end in disaster. We hoped if they delayed it their relationship would come to its own natural conclusion.  We always thought someone would get hurt although we could never forsee this happening.

I don't know to what extent you know of what went on here in Cullivoe.  The police were involved on two occasions that we know of.  There were numerous other occasions that were kept quiet by the Williamsons here in Yell.  Billy and Kareens next door neighbour was very upset by what was happening.  She was Christina's chaperone to nursery in the taxi.  She said every Friday night was the same,  they would be woken up in the middle of the night with Kareen screaming and sometimes she would hear Christina crying.  She wanted to report Billy and Kareen to social services but luckily for them she spoke to her sister first about it who lives here in Cullivoe.  She suggested speaking to Jean Saunders which she did.  Jean said that if anything happened which she was worried about the neighbour was to phone her first.  As a consequence Jean and John were in the square on more than one occasion. Kareen and the bairns came here to stay the night one of the times.  It was very upsetting for me as my mam had just died suddenly 2 weeks before and I was 6 months pregnant for Amanda. When I answered the phone in the middle of the night to hear Kareen screaming I thought she was being murdered.

We never could figure out what was going on but when Kareen left Billy and went to Brae she told me a few things and it all fitted together like a jig-saw puzzle.  I know that she went on to tell her uncle Andy and Gilda even more so don't be too harsh on them because you have to understand that Kareen very much made Billy out to be the bad guy. I don't know the truth of the matter because Kareen told one story and Billy told the opposite.

I don't know where this idea that the Williamsons never visited Kareen here in Cullivoe came from because to my mind it is simply not true. Susan was there at least twice a week, Christina and Lana were best friends.  Although Carol doesn't drive she came at least once a week before or after choir practice and if she was working at the school she was there more often.  All the family turned up for any birthday parties or occasions.

I know you are living a nightmare at the moment and of course you want to believe Billy, he is your son. We will all have to await what evidence comes out at the trial.  I hope you are not to upset by this email that is not my intention at all.  No-matter what the truth is of what happened that awful night the letter we wrote from C & A still holds true and I used to call Billy Christophers' right hand. He is a terrible miss at work.

This is a hard thing for everyone involved to come to terms with and our deepest sympathy is with you,

Marina.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg385713.html#msg385713


"I do feel incredibly angry that Billy Middleton feels that he has the right to publish on the internet whatever he wants without fear of retribution.

Reading his MOJ2010 speech just puts my blood pressure right up because there is hardly one single paragraph that contains the whole truth. Unfortunately there is very little that I can state as "fact" as at it would mean exposing people and information that at the moment has to remain confidential. I am, however, now in a position to comment on the following subject things that I was told as Billy took it upon himself to expose his ex-wife as the person to whom the sexual assault charges concerned.

He himself describes the charge as "sexual abuse". I'm unclear why. As far as I know the charges were of sexual assault. To my mind sexual abuse indicates a more long term situation. A freudian slip, perhaps?. Maybe this was closer to the truth of what was happening in Billy and Kareen's relationship.

However Billy Middleton states: "They then threw in a charge of sexual abuse against my wife instead but both she and her uncle proved in court it was not physically possible because we were about 60 miles apart at the time and the doctor who examined her testified that there was no physical evidence to support it.

Billy put forward a special plea of 'consent' to the sexual assault charges yet in the statement above he is implying that it never happened and that this was "proved in court". He can't have it both ways - either his ex-wife consented or else it didn't happen, not both.

The only 'incident' of sexual assault Kareen discussed with me in any detail was the time that caused her to leave Billy in April/May 2007. Remember, this was about 2 years before the trial and 18 months before the fire. It was the first time I visited her at her aunt and uncle's house in Brae after she left Cullivoe with the kids. She told me what Billy had done to her. Needless to say, I was appalled. She was upset and confused and asked my advice on what to do. She spoke about going back to him as she was afraid if she left him for good what he would do. Billy was constantly texting her and using the children as a weapon against her, saying things like did she really want the kids to come from a broken home and she was to think about the effect all this was having on them. Things like that. I advised her not to go back to him. She was 3 months pregnant with Annalise at the time.

Kareen had not been happy for a long time. Billy spent much of his home time on the computer. Kareen was sure he was in contact with other women. She looked up the history on their computer one day Billy was at work and found that he had googled "rape", "torture" and "p***y fisting". Billy had been visiting hardcore BDSM sites and Kareen was scared - is this what he had in mind for her? She told me things had been escalating against her will in the bedroom. She did not tell me the exact date of when the assault had taken place but I did get the impression that she had waited a few days before leaving him and moving to Brae. She only went to see the GP the day after she moved to Brae on her aunt and uncle's insistance. From my understanding of what Kareen has told me because she had waited a number of days and because she had given birth to 2 children naturally the GP was non-committal about any signs of an assault having taken place.

When Kareen took Billy back most of her family and friends distanced themselves from her including me. I felt embarrassed because I had tried to advise her not to take him back but she had and it felt very awkward. I know her family felt the same way. We have spoke since about the reasons why she took him back and I can absolutely see why she did - she was a typical abused wife caught in a cycle of abuse. She told me that one of the conditions she took him back on was if he saw a counsellor. He showed her a letter with an appointment but does not know if he ever attended. All she knows is that the abuse only ever got worse and because she no longer felt she could turn to her friends and family she was completely isolated.


"For reasons only known to themselves the police never interviewed either myself or Kareen's counsellor whom she was seeing regarding unresolved issues from her childhood and also the difficulties she was experiencing within her own relationship with Billy. She told her counsellor everything.

However, following the trial Kareen's solicitor did take a statement from her counsellor. That is why Billy never fought to see the kids. His lies would be exposed before his family and he couldn't let that happen
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg385712.html#msg385712

[Nicholas]

“The personal attacks and divisions are very sad - they direct attention away from what really matters,”

Yet a year and a half earlier:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,8086.msg384537.html#msg384537

»ADMINISTRATORS NOTE: I HAVE BEEN SENT THE FOLLOWING BY SANDRA AT 20:59 = That's Dr Sandra Lean to you and me (published by Billy Middleton November 23, 2010, 10:12:25 pm)

It is with extreme sadness and regret that I am making this post, but the events of this afternoon have left me with no choice. Whether people accept it or not, posts on internet sites have real life consequences.

Almost two months ago, at the beginning of October,  Stephanie requested that Simon’s caseblog be closed, pending the appeal. I explained at the time, on the forum,  that this is quite common practice in the run up to an appeal.  At that time, there were also discussions regarding taking down all facebook related content connected with Simon’s case(which Wrongly Accused Person had no connection with whatsoever) as Stephanie felt she was being attacked from many angles. The forum at Wrongly Accused was not one of the places this was happening.

Stephanie was happy with this arrangement at the time, and posted to that effect on the forum.

It was confirmed on October 3rd that Billy had closed Simon’s caseblog, and put up a message stating that this was pending the appeal. For reasons which will become clear, however, he advised Stephanie that he would be writing to Simon asking him to confirm future changes, etc, to the site.

The following series of events covers recent claims about the closing of the site:

November 17th at 12.52: an email was received at Wrongly Accused, addressed to Billy, which began, “Dear Billy, you may or may not have received a letter from Simon requesting that his site be taken down from Wrongly Accused.” It goes on, “We ask that you please remove all content relating to Simon’s case, and that the thread on the wrongly accused be locked.”

November 18th at 15:40 (less than 27 hours later) another email was received stating that Billy “appeared to be ignoring emails.” A facebook post was also made, on Stephanie’s behalf, asking that Billy read his “private emails.”

November 19that 10.48am: a request was made to let Stephanie know if Simon’s letter had been received, and on November 20th, it was confirmed that it had not yet been.

November 20th  at 10.04am: Stephanie posted on the forum “Simon has been asking for over a week to have his caseblog closed down completely and for this thread to be locked.” This post was less than 72 hours after the initial email regarding a letter Billy “may or may not have received.” 

November 21st:The  post was re-posted on the McKie site
 
November 22nd, at 1.09 (which is 12.09, real time): Stephanie posted “After two weeks of Billy ignoring Simon’s express wishes and requests.....” (this was 5 days after the initial contact.)

November 22nd at 6.12pm (5 hours after the above post) an email was received at Wrongly Accused from Stephanie as follows: “It would appear you have received Simon's letter. Therefore, please remove entirely his caseblog.I think you will find, if he asked for a message to be put up, he meant within the thread, bearing in mind he is in prison and does not understand how it all works. We wish the site to no longer be found in a search, it's that simple.”

This was the first reference to the site “no longer being found in a search.”

However, Simon’s letter had, indeed, been received by then, and a clear difficulty had arisen. It would be both unethical and unprofessional to post the letter in its entirety without Simon’s permission, but the pertinent parts state the following:

“I understand the website is closed pending appeal but other bits relating to the site are open. Is that right? If so, please stop everything to do with my case, and that includes forums, walls or whatever else people insult each other on. Also, could you change the “closed pending appeal” to the following:

“In the interests of justice and pending Mr Hall’s forthcoming appeal, this website is temporarily closed. Simon would like to thank everyone for their support and their continued interest in his case.”

We were faced with a dilemma – Simon’s letter does not talk about taking everything down, or making his case unable to be found in a search – indeed, he is quite clear that he wants a message displayed on his site, and has included the word “temporarily,” which did not feature before. He asks that everything be “stopped.” The caseblog had been closed since early October, and the forum was locked on November 21st, so Simon’s requests had already been dealt with.

Stephanie’s requests, on the other hand, had changed, and continued to change, from closing the site, to taking everything down completely, to ensuring nothing could be found in a web search (something, incidentally, we could not guarantee, even if we took the entire site down.) Even her last email is unclear – how could a message from Simon be posted in “a thread” if the forum had also been removed?

The disingenuous portrayal of delay, posted publicly within 72 hours, was deeply concerning, as there had been previous instances of such behaviour.

Between October 2nd and October 4th, at a time where I was extremely busy, I had received 20 emails from Stephanie, between private messages and those which had come through wrongly accused, along with a number of texts.  I had not had time to respond to these, but Stephanie concluded that I was “ignoring” her.

I wrote a long email on October 4th, explaining the circumstances. Part of that email, however, referred to a post Stephanie had put on the Wrongly Accused forum meantime, in her belief that I was ignoring her.  (Note this is only a 48 hour period.) I wrote, “I'm also interested in why you chose to use my facebook post (adapted) to post on wrongly accused. Following from Shirley's post as it does, it makes it look like one of the "un-named" individuals is me. I have never attacked you, criticised you or made any other negative comment about you anywhere - I may simply be reading too much into it, but that is certainly how it came across.”

Stephanie responded:“....yes, I did use your post on facebook on the wrongly accused, and when I did I knew you would be more annoyed over that than you are about what I am going through at the moment. And I have a couple of friends that will verify that. “

I was extremely concerned at this, as it appeared that Stephanie was happy to have me painted in a dishonest light, simply because I had not responded immediately to her emails. Other things going on behind the scenes had alerted me to the possibility that Stephanie was not being entirely straight with me.

The next difficulty arose over the claims that outsider/smiffy was Billy. John Lamberton was posting some pretty damning claims about things Stephanie had purportedly told him. Worried that these claims might reflect badly on Stephanie, I attempted to pre-empt further claims by suggesting a possible source of John’s assumption that outsider/smiffy was Billy. Stephanie immediately PM’d me and emailed me, but before I had even had a chance to read her messages, and respond, she had posted on the forum claiming that my post was “untrue.” I emailed Stephanie privately, although she continued to post. Part of my last message, on November 15th  was, “Before I had had a chance to respond to your messages, you were posting that what I had said was "untrue." By the time I had clarified the situation, you were still claiming in your emails that what I had said was "untrue." It seems to me you simply did not understand, or chose not to believe, what I was saying. There's nothing I can do about that - what hurts is that you could not step back, knowing me as I thought you did, and ask yourself, is there perhaps another explanation for this. Nope, instant public condemnation, in the belief that you were being attacked, when, in fact, I was trying to defend you.”

I finished this email by saying, “I can only finish by saying that I am truly heart-broken at how these events have panned out. That your words are being used to paint me as dishonest and unreliable, and that in turn is being used to undermine Luke's case, is probably one of the worst experiences in all of this. I thought you were my friend.”

On both of these occasions, Stephanie had made public accusations, apparently without any thought of consequence, and was doing so again regarding the closing/removal of Simon’s site.

We had decided that the best course of action would be to ignore the public accusations and write to Simon for further clarification, however this evening’s events have forced a decision based on other factors.

Entering a local store this evening, I was approached by a man who greeted me with the following:

 “You are one f*cking sick little bitch. How long did you think folk were going to take your lies and p*sh? Weren’t happy destroying one family’s life, eh? Now you’ve started on somebody else’s. How many more you twisted little f*ck? Yours is coming, don’t you worry about it. You’ll get yours you twisted little c**t – there’s plenty just waiting their chance.”

I assume this came about as a result of various claims being made on various websites. In principle, I would not back down to such bullying and threatening behaviour. However, I have to live here, as do my family, and in view of the fact that Simon’s appeal is imminent, it is with a very heavy heart that I have asked Billy to remove everything relating to Simon’s case from the site.

I would emphasise wholeheartedly that my support for Simon and Stephanie is unwavering, and I hope with all my heart that the appeal is successful, and they are able to begin to build their life together, as they should be.

What’s also interesting with this is the fact Sandra Lean had been threatened by her partner Billy Middleton in her own home and her daughter had to intervene.

Why didn’t the penny drop?

Why didn’t she recognise in him what others (Including myself) had recognised?

She wouldn’t have mentioned to me the fact he’d been leaving cigarettes burning in the ashtray if she hadn’t then doubted him?

Why didn’t she call the police and report him?

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean stated: “When the commission refused to refer the case back - I had no idea what else could be done. With a case as strong as we put forward..... ” and I didn’t know what else I could do emotions were running high obviously it was a major blow that they refused to refer it back but I didn’t know where we could go after that..

So let’s go down the “Confirmation bias” route.

https://thecrimereport.org/2019/07/16/confirmation-bias-called-a-key-reason-for-wrongful-convictions/



‘Confirmation Bias’ Called a Key Reason for Wrongful Convictions