Author Topic: Luke Mitchell ‘absolutely delighted’ with support after documentary.  (Read 4818 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Venturi Swirl

Take the reasons why you think he’s guilty, flip it and add a dash of logic.
LOL
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Angelo222

‘ Such prisoners have been labelled as ‘deniers’ with no account taken of the various reasons for maintaining innocence, nor the undeniable truth that some may actually be innocent. These prisoners once were unable to achieve parole unless they undertook offence-behaviour courses that required the admission of guilt as a prerequisite. Innocent prisoners were given the choice between freedom, in exchange for claiming guilt, or remaining imprisoned and telling the truth. This situation is not quite as stark as it once was. In England, and to a lesser degree Scotland, those maintaining innocence have access to limited training for freedom which I have been advised by clients in custody are labelled “deniers’ courses” within their prison’

https://mojoscotland.org/the-innocent-prisoners-dilemma/

Mitchell is perceived as a continuing risk imo and that is why he might not be considered for parole and released early and not because he claims to be innocent. Yet more smoke and bluster from Mitchell supporters.
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Angelo222

Take the reasons why you think he’s guilty, flip it and add a dash of logic.

Typical no new argument response, the difference being my reasons stand up to scrutiny while yours don't even get off the starting grid for logic.
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Venturi Swirl

‘ Such prisoners have been labelled as ‘deniers’ with no account taken of the various reasons for maintaining innocence, nor the undeniable truth that some may actually be innocent. These prisoners once were unable to achieve parole unless they undertook offence-behaviour courses that required the admission of guilt as a prerequisite. Innocent prisoners were given the choice between freedom, in exchange for claiming guilt, or remaining imprisoned and telling the truth. This situation is not quite as stark as it once was. In England, and to a lesser degree Scotland, those maintaining innocence have access to limited training for freedom which I have been advised by clients in custody are labelled “deniers’ courses” within their prison’

https://mojoscotland.org/the-innocent-prisoners-dilemma/
you do realise you’ce just proved yourself wrong with this quote don’t you?
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
  • Total likes: 796
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Mitchell is perceived as a continuing risk imo and that is why he might not be considered for parole and released early and not because he claims to be innocent. Yet more smoke and bluster from Mitchell supporters.


IF Luke is guilty, why do you think he killed Jodi, Angelo?  I can't see any reason why he would have, unless he was high on cannabis, and not in control of what he was doing. 

IF he no longer wanted to go out with her, because he preferred another girl,  he could just have dumped her. Teenagers dump each other all the time!

Offline Venturi Swirl


IF Luke is guilty, why do you think he killed Jodi, Angelo?  I can't see any reason why he would have, unless he was high on cannabis, and not in control of what he was doing. 

IF he no longer wanted to go out with her, because he preferred another girl,  he could just have dumped her. Teenagers dump each other all the time!
Jodi was brutally murdered, her body sustaining absolutely horrific injuries.  What motive could ANYONE have had for such a frenzied and appalling attack on a young girl?
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline WakeyWakey


IF Luke is guilty, why do you think he killed Jodi, Angelo?  I can't see any reason why he would have, unless he was high on cannabis, and not in control of what he was doing. 

IF he no longer wanted to go out with her, because he preferred another girl,  he could just have dumped her. Teenagers dump each other all the time!

your approaching this from your own perspective as rational person. the attack jodi endured was not rational.

Offline faithlilly

Typical no new argument response, the difference being my reasons stand up to scrutiny while yours don't even get off the starting grid for logic.

I’ve not read your reasons so I’m afraid I can’t judge. Care to share?
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline faithlilly


IF Luke is guilty, why do you think he killed Jodi, Angelo?  I can't see any reason why he would have, unless he was high on cannabis, and not in control of what he was doing. 

IF he no longer wanted to go out with her, because he preferred another girl,  he could just have dumped her. Teenagers dump each other all the time!

There was no cannabis in Luke’s system.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Parky41

There are many prisoners who have confessed their guilt and fail their parole hearings, time after time. For murder that was deemed a much lesser disturbed one than that of Jodi Jones.

LM will know, that even with a confession of guilt, the likelihood of him gaining freedom may still be very slim. Therefore misleading people into thinking he must be innocent or he would be eligible for rehabilitation and release is wrong - it is in no way proof that he is anything other than guilty - as it stands.

Does and will the system allow the release of someone that committed such a heinous crime - back into society? Without concrete proof of innocence.

There is no proof of innocence - nothing has changed, same old pointing the finger at 'actual' and 'factual' innocent people, you know the one's who have not stood trial and been convicted.
People in our society who have had to endure the fairy tales that are spouted by those who demand 'Truth  and Justice' sought by lies themselves?!

When confronted with these lies excuses are made of , the lie is not the point the point is these people should have done this? really, that makes their lies acceptable? as these people did not do what Ms Lean thought they should have done - in the fairy tale?

An example of this from the podcasts - the one in which Ms Lean and Ms Mitchel were singing from very different hymn sheets. Ms Lean is correct and Ms Mitchel simply confused?!
Nearly 17yrs to refine these episodes of acting some very strange parts.

I noticed now Ms Lean, perhaps due to more local people taking an interest has changed her wording from "The search trio had to walk directly passed YW's house" to now claiming they should have popped into here as it was mere yards away when going to this path. Still trying to push some same futile point however. With just a little exaggeration - Just yards away - is that 10 yards. 500 yards, a mile perhaps? Like the condom - was it just yards, 20yards or 50yards, used to infer it was very close to where this girl lay - really? hell of a lot of trees in-between these yards?

Jodi Jones was not found by any dog walkers, or the likes all of that evening. Hidden perhaps to enable the person who is sitting in prison time to cover up and dispose?
Why would the person who left a whole condom worth of DNA have seen anything - that will be the other diversion tactic of walking rights passed, really - no he did not Ms Lean, did he now? Let's keep him a suspect though - what else is there to do when there is no evidence to show LM is innocent but point the finger elsewhere at innocent people.

Happens inside the court, why not outside - simple reason really, it's called a prosecution and defence. Not a one man band - oops two man band, at times?
Those who do not wish to see will gladly have the wool pulled over their eyes - that's life.

Offline Venturi Swirl

There was no cannabis in Luke’s system.
He wasn’t arrested until months after the murder so when was he tested for the drug?
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Angelo222

I’ve not read your reasons so I’m afraid I can’t judge. Care to share?

I asked you first why you think he is innocent?
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Angelo222


IF Luke is guilty, why do you think he killed Jodi, Angelo?  I can't see any reason why he would have, unless he was high on cannabis, and not in control of what he was doing. 

IF he no longer wanted to go out with her, because he preferred another girl,  he could just have dumped her. Teenagers dump each other all the time!

Why did he attack any of the girls?  A psycho perhaps?
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline Angelo222

There are many prisoners who have confessed their guilt and fail their parole hearings, time after time. For murder that was deemed a much lesser disturbed one than that of Jodi Jones.

LM will know, that even with a confession of guilt, the likelihood of him gaining freedom may still be very slim. Therefore misleading people into thinking he must be innocent or he would be eligible for rehabilitation and release is wrong - it is in no way proof that he is anything other than guilty - as it stands.

Does and will the system allow the release of someone that committed such a heinous crime - back into society? Without concrete proof of innocence.

There is no proof of innocence - nothing has changed, same old pointing the finger at 'actual' and 'factual' innocent people, you know the one's who have not stood trial and been convicted.
People in our society who have had to endure the fairy tales that are spouted by those who demand 'Truth  and Justice' sought by lies themselves?!

When confronted with these lies excuses are made of , the lie is not the point the point is these people should have done this? really, that makes their lies acceptable? as these people did not do what Ms Lean thought they should have done - in the fairy tale?

An example of this from the podcasts - the one in which Ms Lean and Ms Mitchel were singing from very different hymn sheets. Ms Lean is correct and Ms Mitchel simply confused?!
Nearly 17yrs to refine these episodes of acting some very strange parts.

I noticed now Ms Lean, perhaps due to more local people taking an interest has changed her wording from "The search trio had to walk directly passed YW's house" to now claiming they should have popped into here as it was mere yards away when going to this path. Still trying to push some same futile point however. With just a little exaggeration - Just yards away - is that 10 yards. 500 yards, a mile perhaps? Like the condom - was it just yards, 20yards or 50yards, used to infer it was very close to where this girl lay - really? hell of a lot of trees in-between these yards?

Jodi Jones was not found by any dog walkers, or the likes all of that evening. Hidden perhaps to enable the person who is sitting in prison time to cover up and dispose?
Why would the person who left a whole condom worth of DNA have seen anything - that will be the other diversion tactic of walking rights passed, really - no he did not Ms Lean, did he now? Let's keep him a suspect though - what else is there to do when there is no evidence to show LM is innocent but point the finger elsewhere at innocent people.

Happens inside the court, why not outside - simple reason really, it's called a prosecution and defence. Not a one man band - oops two man band, at times?
Those who do not wish to see will gladly have the wool pulled over their eyes - that's life.

Post of the day Parky  8((()*/
De troothe has the annoying habit of coming to the surface just when you least expect it!!

Je ne regrette rien!!

Offline DanniCash

Take the reasons why you think he’s guilty, flip it and add a dash of logic.

What does this actually mean?