Author Topic: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?  (Read 62017 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rulesapply

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #960 on: July 24, 2021, 10:48:37 PM »
The fact that he thought he’d been stood up maybe?

He didn't think he'd been dumped if he thought poor Jodi had been grounded.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #961 on: July 25, 2021, 12:17:46 AM »
He didn't think he'd been dumped if he thought poor Jodi had been grounded.

I believe he had several scenarios that he thought possible.
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

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #962 on: July 25, 2021, 12:41:59 PM »
The fact that he thought he’d been stood up maybe?

Absolute nonsense:  And that is exactly what the Jury clearly took from it. 90 mins of claiming to be twiddling your thumbs. Here are those clear contradictions. Said he thought she had been grounded to Jodi's mother. Not coming out to the boys in the Abbey. Dumped to the police. Meeting at 6pm, claimed to have left home around 5.45pm. Caught with that first call in the phone logs at 5.32pm. Claimed to have only walked to a certain point up Newbattle Road, caught by the motorists at a point he claimed not to have walked to. And of course F&W. Claimed to have asked his mother if Jodi had been to the house, that contradiction in that she could not have gotten past him. (Not interested in Sandra's theories, or possible explanations speaking on behalf of him) Claimed that Jodi would have been walking that isolated path alone - Her mother telling the police that Jodi was not allowed to walk that path alone. The evidence around this outweighs those attempts by DF of tripping Janine up. JaJ did not even know which path. Not interested in SL's rabbits out of a hat, where she used an excerpt from AW's statement. Pretty much discard most of what Ms Lean puts forward, the more we realise just how little she has actually had access to. That 5% of empty bias. Where those with blind faith simply accept not knowing the context of all that evidence. And it is only those with blind faith, with little thought for the actual truth, who eagerly soak it all up. For the truth does not lie in the little that Ms Lean has ever had.

And of Ms Lean and those scales of Justice with one pan staying firmly on the ground, laden down with bias in this solo defence. Where one cherry picks those areas of cross examination from Findlay's hand me downs to her. That have no bearing, as useless as LM's one's he had just like Grandma's because he like them, for the police to ask him "do you have any other ornaments, just like your granny's?" Toy scales of Justice for the Pinocchio's.

So we have this non existent alibi, LM was not at home. There was no rushing of any dinner, there was none. That 13mins. For greetings, to finish cooking dinner, to plate up and eat for both boys to be gone by 5.30pm - poppycock. The lies which resulted in every part of that disintegrating. The only people to strive to give an alibi, the only people that knew exactly when it was needed for. And they tried, then those outside factors just exposed those lies, and the hole grew to such an expanse, that no amount of extraordinary explanations was going to shore that over. Of going out back to chat with Mummy whilst she was enjoying that fine weather after been cooped up all day. Really? She ran a business that involved a lot of outdoor work.

To those 90mins, and if there is one clear thing in all of this that people could not fail to see, LM waited for no one. As we saw with the boys from the Abbey. And this utter BS of being stood up, and people just accept this nonsense, for they are told that once before Jodi had failed to show, what they are not told are any details around this. That there had been communication. There was no waiting around anywhere, and most definitely not from walking any isolated path on her own.

So no alibi, no waiting anywhere for the best part of 90mins. We know that at the times LM was actually on Newbattle Road he was seen. That brief crossing over and spotted by F&W. That 15 - 20min period and saw by the cyclists twice, one motorist who knew him and of course the other one again at a place he claimed not to be. Then nothing for the rest of that time as LM was not on Newbattle Road. He was setting that alibi in place, getting cleaned up and arranging disposal of evidence.

Those contradictions around the fire. We have evidence from both LM and his mother about the fire, the changing stories around this. Lean in her black is white mode still desires to twist it. No flames seen so no evidence of an actual fire, just smoke. That consistent way in which she alters things as she goes along. From LM not smoking, to smoking, to then only smoking at certain points. That MAYBE he had popped just inside the gates of the Abbey for a  smoke and out again, missed Jodi in the process. Really? That web of deceit capturing every lie.. And the burner, that tiny thing? Really? It was an open pit covered by a dustpan lid. Removable base. Irrespective of what was being burnt that evening it yet again produced an abundance of misinformation and half truths.

So no alibi. That abundance of time unseen and caught again in that web of deceit. That brief get together with the boys and again more deceit in going home. Being prepped and ready for that call. Within minutes of the police being phoned LM is the RDP, prior to 11pm. He is still on the RDP by 11.20pm

For here we have the most amazing find in extraordinary times. 10.49pm LM introduces the notion of searching the RDP after he tells Judith that Jodi failed to turn up in Newbattle. He tells her mother he will check the path on his way to Easthouse's. 10.50pm the police are called. 10.59pm he is on that path. 11.20pm he is still on the path. The police are in attendance at Judith's, they had barely written that missing person report and that call came through, a body had been found. The time is 11.34pm.

That control. Of being prepped and ready. Of introducing that path as a possible area for Jodi to be. Prior to any friends etc being phoned. That path first. Making that claim clear that Jodi was supposed to have walked it. Of asking that someone bring something of Jodi's for his dog to scent with. Of asking if they had anything when they arrived. Of introducing the notion of the woods at the Gino spot. Of enticing that dog at the V not a foot past it. Directly at that V break. Of entering that woodland, completely familiar with the territory, mere seconds and shouting out.

And the lies just kept on coming. Of being segregated - lies. Of having his phone taken from him - lies.Of being at that station long before his mother - lies. Of being treated differently by being taken to that station - yes for his mother, for ease of locality. Of being stripped of his clothing - lies, they were requested.  And his mother arrived at the station just minutes behind him. She had spoken to the police on Newbattle Road when heading to the station at the same time as Luke. She asked them "is he under arrest?" He was still in possession of his phone in the car. LM was with the rest of the search party behind the high school for a considerable amount of time, cadging fags playing around with his phone.

Tunnel vision? .Fit up? Singled out? - In that cock and bull story he fed to Lean in that 7 month period of time, that calm before the storm. When he told her that guff, of being singled out, of trying to get his DNA over the wall, of stripping him, of taking his phone, of his mother not arriving for over an hour, of her trying to get a hold of him and the police having the phone, of walking way past that V, of the dog, of the alibi and every other lie - And this was readily swallowed up as Ms Lean had already declared Mitchell innocent. And in the same way she was played for a fool, she is doing unto others is she not? - The case that she has produced being added and subtracted from. As the original LM V HMA disintegrates much in the same way as Mitchells alibi, that he strived to give to the police.

Offline rulesapply

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #963 on: July 25, 2021, 02:43:32 PM »
I believe he had several scenarios that he thought possible.

Grounded wasn't one of his scenarios though. At least, not here.

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Accused+Mitchell+%27anxious%27over+Jodi.-a0126407953

Offline rulesapply

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #964 on: July 25, 2021, 03:00:44 PM »
Killer Luke Mitchell also said he thought Jodi had dumped him


Yeah. Maybe Jodi had indeed dumped him.

Offline Nicholas

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #965 on: July 25, 2021, 06:10:55 PM »
I know. That double barrel of pulling the wool over people with this misconception, that she had access, physically to more than she has ever had.As in trial transcripts and so forth. The blatant pretence of not actually knowing if he gave evidence or not, is just that. Using one over the other. Whilst attempting to cover her back one way, has opened up that admittance yet again, of all that she does not, and has never had. As with R. Kelly's statement. And so much more. Which one has used as above, to tout out those half truths, misinformation and blatant lies.

As I had already pulled some followers up on. By pleading ignorance, letting people, as one does with most of the misinformation. tout out any nonsense around this. Dispersing all sorts of doubt upon innocent people. Exactly what is aimed for.

And I’m of the view Sandra Lean has done this from the very beginning

For me she’s a highly deceptive individual

« Last Edit: July 25, 2021, 06:16:23 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline rulesapply

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #966 on: July 25, 2021, 06:53:28 PM »
And I’m of the view Sandra Lean has done this from the very beginning

For me she’s a highly deceptive individual

I have lost count of the times I have asked SL if she sat through the trial only to be ignored whilst everyone around me was answered their question at least once. Except for once when her answer was, I know more about the case and the trial than anyone else in Scotland. She could have just said, no, way before that. I took that as a no but the problem with that kind of deliberate deception is that many people took that to be a ,yes. That empowers them and in turn it empowers her and IMO it's still all just a lie.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #967 on: July 25, 2021, 07:05:53 PM »
I have lost count of the times I have asked SL if she sat through the trial only to be ignored whilst everyone around me was answered their question at least once. Except for once when her answer was, I know more about the case and the trial than anyone else in Scotland. She could have just said, no, way before that. I took that as a no but the problem with that kind of deliberate deception is that many people took that to be a ,yes. That empowers them and in turn it empowers her and IMO it's still all just a lie.

She didn’t lie. She simply didn’t answer you…her prerogative.
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 Nicholas

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #968 on: July 25, 2021, 08:13:59 PM »
She didn’t lie. She simply didn’t answer you…her prerogative.

She lies by omission

Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #969 on: July 25, 2021, 08:23:13 PM »
She lies by omission

She didn’t omit anything. She simply didn’t answer. There is a difference.
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 rulesapply

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #970 on: July 25, 2021, 08:34:39 PM »
She didn’t lie. She simply didn’t answer you…her prerogative.

She didn't deceive me. I couldn't see a straight answer but others were deceived and SL allowed them to be and that is dishonest.

Offline rulesapply

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #971 on: July 25, 2021, 08:41:21 PM »
She didn’t omit anything. She simply didn’t answer. There is a difference.

She did answer. You missed a bit.

Offline Dexter

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #972 on: July 25, 2021, 08:51:43 PM »
She didn’t lie. She simply didn’t answer you…her prerogative.

Of course it is.

Offline rulesapply

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #973 on: July 25, 2021, 09:12:21 PM »
SMH

Offline Dexter

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #974 on: July 26, 2021, 08:09:47 AM »