Author Topic: Luke Mitchell Theories  (Read 5504 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #30 on: June 12, 2019, 02:21:46 PM »
Didnt jodis step father tell luke she was on the way to meet him, when david later asked luke where jodi was, luke said she was grounded?

Jodi’s step-father Alan Ovens did indeed tell Mitchell that she had left to come and meet him.  This phone call was at 17:40pm, approximately 50 minutes after she had left.  Assuming the walk from Jodi’s house took 10 minutes to the rendezvous point with Mitchell, he supposedly waited for 40 minutes before initiating contact with Jodi’s parents asking where she was. 

I personally think this in itself seems quite a while to be waiting on someone who lived ten minutes away from the meeting point.  Why didn’t he raise the alarm sooner?

What’s more concerning is what happened after the phone call with Alan Ovens - Mitchell returns to Newbattle and tells a friend by the name of David High that she wasn’t coming out, hence why he was alone.  Why would he do this, given her step-father had just categorically told him over the telephone that she had left to meet him?

For the rest of that evening, Mitchell failed to raise the alarm that she was missing, however so did Alan Ovens.  When Alan Ovens exchanged communication with Mitchell at 17:40pm, he would have then been made aware that Jodi hadn’t arrived to meet Mitchell, hence why he was phoning looking for her.  Neither Mitchell or the Jones family raised the alarm that she had left the house and hadn’t arrived at her destination.

This is extremely bizarre.  The next time Jodi is even mentioned is via a text message from her mother to Mitchell’s mobile telephone telling her she’s grounded.  At that point, the mother obviously thought she had sneaked away somewhere else that nobody knew about.   However, why did Mitchell want to know the exact time at 16:54pm just after Jodi had left the house? Findlay, in Mitchell’s defence, didn’t mention that Mitchell used the speaking clock service before, so why did he do it on the evening Jodi died? If Mitchell was at home cooking dinner when this call was made at 16:54, then we could have expected him to have arrived at the rendezvous point around 15 minutes later, probably around 17:10pm.  Jodi was expected to be there before this, as she would have had less distance to walk.  Jodi left about 16:50pm.  Her arrival time would have been around 17:00pm.  Seems like a fair time to meet - it’s a whole number and likely to have been the arranged time.

Why, then, was Mitchell phoning the speaking clock after she had already left the house? If Mitchell was at home preparing dinner at between 16:50-17:40, then why was an arrangement made in the first place to meet at the Easthouses end of the path?
« Last Edit: June 12, 2019, 02:58:46 PM by TheArmchairDetective »

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #31 on: June 12, 2019, 02:47:41 PM »
This is also interesting:

A series of texts between Jodi and Mitchell were exchanged just before she left to meet him.  They were unable to recover the content of these texts, but going by what Jodi said to her mother on her way out the door at 16:50 - that she was going to meet Mitchell  - then why, as I said in the previous post, would he be at home? Are we to believe his word over a girl who is unable to corroborate her version of events because she is deceased?

The simple, most obvious reason she told her mum she was going to meet Mitchell is because she was.  That’s what was arranged via the texting.  That’s what the plan was.  Why would Jodi leave the house and tell her mum this if it wasn’t true? She most likely was going to meet him, and assumed he would be there at 17:00pm.  He probably was there.  Is he trying to say that after a series of text and Jodi leaving her mums to say she had gone to meet Mitchell that he just thought he would stay at home and leave her standing at the end of the path herself?  He claims they hadn’t arranged a time.  Why the f..k, then, did Jodi tell her mother that she was away to meet him?


Offline Bullseye

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #32 on: June 12, 2019, 04:44:11 PM »
I believe Luke usually made the tea, ready for his mum getting home, ate tea then went out around 1730 ish. On this day Luke’s mum was at work, Shane on the internet til his mum got home. So was the tea cooked as normal for her getting home? We don’t know there were any arrangements to meet at the path or anywhere else as we don’t know the txt content. Is it not also logical to think in the txt said she was not grounded and they would meet up after he had cooked and had tea as usual? Jodi just being ungrounded maybe didn’t want to sit around for another 30 mins and went out, there are 1000 scenarios but only one truth which we will never know as the txts content is not known.

Ao and Luke were both were aware Jodi had left the house. If she left 40 mins earlier and ao was not worried why should luke be, did Luke even know when she left or just that she had left? Either way he waited for her for a while longer then told his mum where he would be incase she did turn up but by that point he just thought she was no longer coming. Not unusual for 14 year olds. Nothing to be overly concerned about, catch up at school tomorrow. Maybe if Jodi had a working mobile at the time he would have sent her a quick text. Who knows.

Offline Baz

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #33 on: June 12, 2019, 05:00:17 PM »
I believe Luke usually made the tea, ready for his mum getting home, ate tea then went out around 1730 ish. On this day Luke’s mum was at work, Shane on the internet til his mum got home. So was the tea cooked as normal for her getting home? We don’t know there were any arrangements to meet at the path or anywhere else as we don’t know the txt content. Is it not also logical to think in the txt said she was not grounded and they would meet up after he had cooked and had tea as usual? Jodi just being ungrounded maybe didn’t want to sit around for another 30 mins and went out, there are 1000 scenarios but only one truth which we will never know as the txts content is not known.

Ao and Luke were both were aware Jodi had left the house. If she left 40 mins earlier and ao was not worried why should luke be, did Luke even know when she left or just that she had left? Either way he waited for her for a while longer then told his mum where he would be incase she did turn up but by that point he just thought she was no longer coming. Not unusual for 14 year olds. Nothing to be overly concerned about, catch up at school tomorrow. Maybe if Jodi had a working mobile at the time he would have sent her a quick text. Who knows.

And then tells his mate she's not coming because she didn't show up and so he assumed she wasn't coming.


Offline Nicholas

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #34 on: June 14, 2019, 09:33:53 AM »
I have occasionally seen Sandra bring up other possible suspects. These are, as far as I am aware, people who have been linked by DNA or by witnesses to the scene.

I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on why Donald Findlay QC put forward James Falconer as an alternative suspect and by the time he was named in the press - by the next day he was ruled out?

”The DNA link, however, has been disputed in court, with prosecutor John Beckett QC telling a recent hearing that DNA from Mr Falconer was "no match whatsoever" with samples collected



12th February 2008
“A MAN named by Luke Mitchell's lawyers as an alternative suspect in the Jodi Jones murder today declared he was "100 per cent innocent".
James Falconer hit out after being identified as a possible suspect in papers lodged by Mitchell's defence team at the Court of Appeal.

He accused Donald Findlay QC, who is leading the appeal, of dragging his name into the mud and accused the lawyer of "sheer desperation".

Mr Falconer, who lives only a few minutes' walk from the secluded spot were 14-year-old Jodi was killed, has been questioned by police in connection with the brutal murder. But detectives are understood to have ruled him out of their investigations.

Mr Falconer, of Reed Drive, Dalkeith, was identified by Mitchell's legal team after being linked to a condom found near the woodland murder scene.

He said: "I was questioned by police and they cleared me. I think it's tragic my name has been dragged into this by Donald Findlay.

"I had nothing to do with the murder. I could never do something like that. I'm 100 per cent innocent."

The defence team alleges that a recently-used condom was found 50 metres from the spot where Jodi was killed, in June 2003. They added that DNA swabs matched a sample taken from Mr Falconer, who they claim also gave false statements to police.

The DNA link, however, has been disputed in court, with prosecutor John Beckett QC telling a recent hearing that DNA from Mr Falconer was "no match whatsoever" with samples collected.

The defence has yet to decide whether to pursue the "fresh evidence" as part of their bid to free Mitchell. Judges would also have to rule whether the evidence was admissible.

Mr Falconer – who is in his mid-20s and lives with his mother Ann and brothers Bryan and Mark – said he had been worried about being targeted as a hate figure. He said: "I didn't know what would happen when it came out. But I've had a great reaction from family, friends and neighbours, who have been very supportive.

"We all know that Luke did it. This case has been hanging over Dalkeith for years. It must be terrible for Jodi's family, so the sooner it goes away the better."

His mother Ann, a nurse, said: "I know my son has done nothing wrong. He didn't have anything to do with the murder."

Mitchell, now 19, was sentenced to serve at least 20 years for the murder of his girlfriend, but the courts started hearing his appeal against the conviction last week.

Court documents submitted by his lawyers said a DNA match between the used condom and Mr Falconer would have been "the cornerstone of the defence case" in the original trial.

The papers added: "This additional evidence is of such significance that the verdict returned in ignorance of it must be regarded as a miscarriage of justice.

"His explanation given to police for semen in a condom lacked credibility and aspects of his statement have proven to be false.

"This condom directly links James Falconer to the scene at or around the time of the murder."

A second "suspect" was also named by Mitchell's team as Mark Kane, an alleged drug user studying at Newbattle Abbey College in Dalkeith, who was "untraceable" during the murder hunt.
https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/i-didn-t-kill-jodi-1-1249412


13th February 2008
Mitchell legal team drops interest in Jodi 'suspect'


“LAWYERS for Luke Mitchell have dropped their interest in one of two new "suspects" for the murder of Jodi Jones, it was announced yesterday.
Attention continues to be focused on the other man, but a court heard that the person who had put forward his name had been hoping to sell the story to the media.

Meanwhile, the prosecution began its reply to claims Mitchell's conviction for murdering Jodi should be quashed, and insisted that there had been no miscarriage of justice.

"There was no direct evidence against him and the case was entirely circumstantial in nature. But there was both sufficient evidence and a rational basis for the conviction," argued the advocate depute, John Beckett, QC.

Mitchell, 19, was found guilty of murdering Jodi in woods off a path near her home in Dalkeith, Midlothian, in June 2003, when they were aged 14, and he was ordered to serve a minimum of 20 years under a life sentence. His appeal is based on several grounds, including that he had not received a fair trial and that there was insufficient evidence to justify the verdict.

His lawyers have also reported to the Court of Criminal Appeal that they are working on an additional ground, which would require the leave of the court to be presented because the time for lodging it has expired.

That ground related initially to two men, Mark Kane and James Falconer, against whom, it was suggested, there was evidence as compelling as the case made against Mitchell.

Donald Findlay, QC, told the appeal judges yesterday that inquiries were continuing in respect of Mr Kane, a student at Newbattle Abbey College, Dalkeith, at the time of the killing. He said Mr Kane "ticked all the boxes" as much as Mitchell was alleged to do.

We have a man who managed to stay below the police radar, a man who lived in the vicinity and who knew the vicinity. He has said to a witness that he was passing the end of the path at or about the time of the murder. He is a man who, in the days after the murder, is behaving oddly, even bizarrely, and has scratch marks to his face which he is trying to hide. He gives an explanation that does not convince those who receive it," said Mr Findlay.

This week, in a newspaper interview, Mr Falconer said he was "100 per cent innocent".

Mr Findlay told the appeal court that "as a result of investigations" he was no longer pursuing an interest in Mr Falconer.

The Crown objects to the new ground being presented, and Mr Beckett told the court that investigations had been carried out after a witness, Scott Forbes, put forward Mr Kane's name.

He indicated Kane had written an essay, Killing a girl in the woods. The Crown had police take a statement from a lecturer and the lecturer confirmed that Kane wrote no such essay. I have information that Scott Forbes told Mark Kane, 'Just admit it … we will get 50,000 from the newspapers'," Mr Beckett said.
https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/mitchell-legal-team-drops-interest-in-jodi-suspect-1-1154608
« Last Edit: June 14, 2019, 12:42:41 PM by Nicholas »
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #35 on: June 14, 2019, 10:10:35 AM »
There are, it seems, a few who agree with you and your criticisms of Sandra Lean. And there are people here who know her in real life and so are perhaps better placed to comment than you and I are. However, I feel she gets judged unfairly and by some it is for personal reasons rather than honest criticisms of her efforts.

Sandra Lean recently stated here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg451892.html#msg451892

So that everyone reading this forum, new and old, is absolutely clear, I posted under one username that was not my own at the very beginning of this case for my own safety and that of my children. My identity was outed by a troll with no concern for the potential consequences. I have not posted using anything other than my own name (or variations of it, depending on the protocols of various sites - so, Sandra L, Dr Sandra, Sandra Lean, etc) in over a decade.


Is she referring to Angeline?
« Last Edit: June 14, 2019, 10:17:03 AM by Nicholas »
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Guiltyascharged

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #36 on: June 14, 2019, 11:04:43 AM »
I think thats one of a few

Offline Baz

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #37 on: June 14, 2019, 01:27:04 PM »
I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on why Donald Findlay QC put forward James Falconer as an alternative suspect and by the time he was named in the press - by the next day he was ruled out?

”The DNA link, however, has been disputed in court, with prosecutor John Beckett QC telling a recent hearing that DNA from Mr Falconer was "no match whatsoever" with samples collected



12th February 2008
“A MAN named by Luke Mitchell's lawyers as an alternative suspect in the Jodi Jones murder today declared he was "100 per cent innocent".
James Falconer hit out after being identified as a possible suspect in papers lodged by Mitchell's defence team at the Court of Appeal.

He accused Donald Findlay QC, who is leading the appeal, of dragging his name into the mud and accused the lawyer of "sheer desperation".

Mr Falconer, who lives only a few minutes' walk from the secluded spot were 14-year-old Jodi was killed, has been questioned by police in connection with the brutal murder. But detectives are understood to have ruled him out of their investigations.

Mr Falconer, of Reed Drive, Dalkeith, was identified by Mitchell's legal team after being linked to a condom found near the woodland murder scene.

He said: "I was questioned by police and they cleared me. I think it's tragic my name has been dragged into this by Donald Findlay.

"I had nothing to do with the murder. I could never do something like that. I'm 100 per cent innocent."

The defence team alleges that a recently-used condom was found 50 metres from the spot where Jodi was killed, in June 2003. They added that DNA swabs matched a sample taken from Mr Falconer, who they claim also gave false statements to police.

The DNA link, however, has been disputed in court, with prosecutor John Beckett QC telling a recent hearing that DNA from Mr Falconer was "no match whatsoever" with samples collected.

The defence has yet to decide whether to pursue the "fresh evidence" as part of their bid to free Mitchell. Judges would also have to rule whether the evidence was admissible.

Mr Falconer – who is in his mid-20s and lives with his mother Ann and brothers Bryan and Mark – said he had been worried about being targeted as a hate figure. He said: "I didn't know what would happen when it came out. But I've had a great reaction from family, friends and neighbours, who have been very supportive.

"We all know that Luke did it. This case has been hanging over Dalkeith for years. It must be terrible for Jodi's family, so the sooner it goes away the better."

His mother Ann, a nurse, said: "I know my son has done nothing wrong. He didn't have anything to do with the murder."

Mitchell, now 19, was sentenced to serve at least 20 years for the murder of his girlfriend, but the courts started hearing his appeal against the conviction last week.

Court documents submitted by his lawyers said a DNA match between the used condom and Mr Falconer would have been "the cornerstone of the defence case" in the original trial.

The papers added: "This additional evidence is of such significance that the verdict returned in ignorance of it must be regarded as a miscarriage of justice.

"His explanation given to police for semen in a condom lacked credibility and aspects of his statement have proven to be false.

"This condom directly links James Falconer to the scene at or around the time of the murder."

A second "suspect" was also named by Mitchell's team as Mark Kane, an alleged drug user studying at Newbattle Abbey College in Dalkeith, who was "untraceable" during the murder hunt.
https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/i-didn-t-kill-jodi-1-1249412


13th February 2008
Mitchell legal team drops interest in Jodi 'suspect'


“LAWYERS for Luke Mitchell have dropped their interest in one of two new "suspects" for the murder of Jodi Jones, it was announced yesterday.
Attention continues to be focused on the other man, but a court heard that the person who had put forward his name had been hoping to sell the story to the media.

Meanwhile, the prosecution began its reply to claims Mitchell's conviction for murdering Jodi should be quashed, and insisted that there had been no miscarriage of justice.

"There was no direct evidence against him and the case was entirely circumstantial in nature. But there was both sufficient evidence and a rational basis for the conviction," argued the advocate depute, John Beckett, QC.

Mitchell, 19, was found guilty of murdering Jodi in woods off a path near her home in Dalkeith, Midlothian, in June 2003, when they were aged 14, and he was ordered to serve a minimum of 20 years under a life sentence. His appeal is based on several grounds, including that he had not received a fair trial and that there was insufficient evidence to justify the verdict.

His lawyers have also reported to the Court of Criminal Appeal that they are working on an additional ground, which would require the leave of the court to be presented because the time for lodging it has expired.

That ground related initially to two men, Mark Kane and James Falconer, against whom, it was suggested, there was evidence as compelling as the case made against Mitchell.

Donald Findlay, QC, told the appeal judges yesterday that inquiries were continuing in respect of Mr Kane, a student at Newbattle Abbey College, Dalkeith, at the time of the killing. He said Mr Kane "ticked all the boxes" as much as Mitchell was alleged to do.

We have a man who managed to stay below the police radar, a man who lived in the vicinity and who knew the vicinity. He has said to a witness that he was passing the end of the path at or about the time of the murder. He is a man who, in the days after the murder, is behaving oddly, even bizarrely, and has scratch marks to his face which he is trying to hide. He gives an explanation that does not convince those who receive it," said Mr Findlay.

This week, in a newspaper interview, Mr Falconer said he was "100 per cent innocent".

Mr Findlay told the appeal court that "as a result of investigations" he was no longer pursuing an interest in Mr Falconer.

The Crown objects to the new ground being presented, and Mr Beckett told the court that investigations had been carried out after a witness, Scott Forbes, put forward Mr Kane's name.

He indicated Kane had written an essay, Killing a girl in the woods. The Crown had police take a statement from a lecturer and the lecturer confirmed that Kane wrote no such essay. I have information that Scott Forbes told Mark Kane, 'Just admit it … we will get 50,000 from the newspapers'," Mr Beckett said.
https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/mitchell-legal-team-drops-interest-in-jodi-suspect-1-1154608

I'm confused by this. The defence have said Falconer is connected to the DNA on the condom but the prosecution said in court that he wasn't. I don't understand how that happens. Why were the defence under the impression that he was? Sounds like the defence was trying to introduce different suspects, which to me is understandable if they have evidence. They presumably thought they did. I'm not expert though. What do you think about it?

Offline Baz

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #38 on: June 14, 2019, 01:29:09 PM »
Sandra Lean recently stated here: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg451892.html#msg451892

So that everyone reading this forum, new and old, is absolutely clear, I posted under one username that was not my own at the very beginning of this case for my own safety and that of my children. My identity was outed by a troll with no concern for the potential consequences. I have not posted using anything other than my own name (or variations of it, depending on the protocols of various sites - so, Sandra L, Dr Sandra, Sandra Lean, etc) in over a decade.


Is she referring to Angeline?
I think thats one of a few

Seems hypocritical to judge when neither of you are posting under your real names? Unless you were Christened Guiltyascharged? Is it a family name?

Offline Nicholas

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #39 on: June 14, 2019, 01:33:23 PM »
Seems hypocritical to judge when neither of you are posting under your real names? Unless you were Christened Guiltyascharged? Is it a family name?

What’s your response to the following Baz? (Highlighted in blue)

I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on why Donald Findlay QC put forward James Falconer as an alternative suspect and by the time he was named in the press - by the next day he was ruled out?

”The DNA link, however, has been disputed in court, with prosecutor John Beckett QC telling a recent hearing that DNA from Mr Falconer was "no match whatsoever" with samples collected




12th February 2008
“A MAN named by Luke Mitchell's lawyers as an alternative suspect in the Jodi Jones murder today declared he was "100 per cent innocent".
James Falconer hit out after being identified as a possible suspect in papers lodged by Mitchell's defence team at the Court of Appeal.

He accused Donald Findlay QC, who is leading the appeal, of dragging his name into the mud and accused the lawyer of "sheer desperation".

Mr Falconer, who lives only a few minutes' walk from the secluded spot were 14-year-old Jodi was killed, has been questioned by police in connection with the brutal murder. But detectives are understood to have ruled him out of their investigations.

Mr Falconer, of Reed Drive, Dalkeith, was identified by Mitchell's legal team after being linked to a condom found near the woodland murder scene.

He said: "I was questioned by police and they cleared me. I think it's tragic my name has been dragged into this by Donald Findlay.

"I had nothing to do with the murder. I could never do something like that. I'm 100 per cent innocent."

The defence team alleges that a recently-used condom was found 50 metres from the spot where Jodi was killed, in June 2003. They added that DNA swabs matched a sample taken from Mr Falconer, who they claim also gave false statements to police.

The DNA link, however, has been disputed in court, with prosecutor John Beckett QC telling a recent hearing that DNA from Mr Falconer was "no match whatsoever" with samples collected.

The defence has yet to decide whether to pursue the "fresh evidence" as part of their bid to free Mitchell. Judges would also have to rule whether the evidence was admissible.

Mr Falconer – who is in his mid-20s and lives with his mother Ann and brothers Bryan and Mark – said he had been worried about being targeted as a hate figure. He said: "I didn't know what would happen when it came out. But I've had a great reaction from family, friends and neighbours, who have been very supportive.

"We all know that Luke did it. This case has been hanging over Dalkeith for years. It must be terrible for Jodi's family, so the sooner it goes away the better."

His mother Ann, a nurse, said: "I know my son has done nothing wrong. He didn't have anything to do with the murder."

Mitchell, now 19, was sentenced to serve at least 20 years for the murder of his girlfriend, but the courts started hearing his appeal against the conviction last week.

Court documents submitted by his lawyers said a DNA match between the used condom and Mr Falconer would have been "the cornerstone of the defence case" in the original trial.

The papers added: "This additional evidence is of such significance that the verdict returned in ignorance of it must be regarded as a miscarriage of justice.

"His explanation given to police for semen in a condom lacked credibility and aspects of his statement have proven to be false.

"This condom directly links James Falconer to the scene at or around the time of the murder."

A second "suspect" was also named by Mitchell's team as Mark Kane, an alleged drug user studying at Newbattle Abbey College in Dalkeith, who was "untraceable" during the murder hunt.
https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/i-didn-t-kill-jodi-1-1249412


13th February 2008
Mitchell legal team drops interest in Jodi 'suspect'


“LAWYERS for Luke Mitchell have dropped their interest in one of two new "suspects" for the murder of Jodi Jones, it was announced yesterday.
Attention continues to be focused on the other man, but a court heard that the person who had put forward his name had been hoping to sell the story to the media.

Meanwhile, the prosecution began its reply to claims Mitchell's conviction for murdering Jodi should be quashed, and insisted that there had been no miscarriage of justice.

"There was no direct evidence against him and the case was entirely circumstantial in nature. But there was both sufficient evidence and a rational basis for the conviction," argued the advocate depute, John Beckett, QC.

Mitchell, 19, was found guilty of murdering Jodi in woods off a path near her home in Dalkeith, Midlothian, in June 2003, when they were aged 14, and he was ordered to serve a minimum of 20 years under a life sentence. His appeal is based on several grounds, including that he had not received a fair trial and that there was insufficient evidence to justify the verdict.

His lawyers have also reported to the Court of Criminal Appeal that they are working on an additional ground, which would require the leave of the court to be presented because the time for lodging it has expired.

That ground related initially to two men, Mark Kane and James Falconer, against whom, it was suggested, there was evidence as compelling as the case made against Mitchell.

Donald Findlay, QC, told the appeal judges yesterday that inquiries were continuing in respect of Mr Kane, a student at Newbattle Abbey College, Dalkeith, at the time of the killing. He said Mr Kane "ticked all the boxes" as much as Mitchell was alleged to do.

We have a man who managed to stay below the police radar, a man who lived in the vicinity and who knew the vicinity. He has said to a witness that he was passing the end of the path at or about the time of the murder. He is a man who, in the days after the murder, is behaving oddly, even bizarrely, and has scratch marks to his face which he is trying to hide. He gives an explanation that does not convince those who receive it," said Mr Findlay.

This week, in a newspaper interview, Mr Falconer said he was "100 per cent innocent".

Mr Findlay told the appeal court that "as a result of investigations" he was no longer pursuing an interest in Mr Falconer.

The Crown objects to the new ground being presented, and Mr Beckett told the court that investigations had been carried out after a witness, Scott Forbes, put forward Mr Kane's name.

He indicated Kane had written an essay, Killing a girl in the woods. The Crown had police take a statement from a lecturer and the lecturer confirmed that Kane wrote no such essay. I have information that Scott Forbes told Mark Kane, 'Just admit it … we will get 50,000 from the newspapers'," Mr Beckett said.
https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/mitchell-legal-team-drops-interest-in-jodi-suspect-1-1154608
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Baz

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #40 on: June 14, 2019, 01:36:52 PM »
What’s your response to the following Baz? (Highlighted in blue)

I responded already:

I'm confused by this. The defence have said Falconer is connected to the DNA on the condom but the prosecution said in court that he wasn't. I don't understand how that happens. Why were the defence under the impression that he was? Sounds like the defence was trying to introduce different suspects, which to me is understandable if they have evidence. They presumably thought they did. I'm not expert though. What do you think about it?

Offline Nicholas

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #41 on: June 14, 2019, 02:21:13 PM »
I have occasionally seen Sandra bring up other possible suspects. These are, as far as I am aware, people who have been linked by DNA or by witnesses to the scene.

And this?

”Officers want to trace two youths spotted on Monday night on a motorbike near the Roman Dyke pathway where Jodi's bloodied and partially dressed body was found in undergrowth. Police do not believe the pair are directly linked to the incident, but they want to know what - if anything - they saw.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/jul/06/ukcrime.scotland
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Nicholas

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #42 on: June 14, 2019, 02:22:04 PM »
I responded already:

So you have  8((()*/
A Lie Can Travel Halfway Around the World While the Truth Is Putting On Its Shoes

Offline Baz

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #43 on: June 14, 2019, 02:40:59 PM »
And this?

”Officers want to trace two youths spotted on Monday night on a motorbike near the Roman Dyke pathway where Jodi's bloodied and partially dressed body was found in undergrowth. Police do not believe the pair are directly linked to the incident, but they want to know what - if anything - they saw.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2003/jul/06/ukcrime.scotland

I'd be interested in why they weren't considered to be linked considering that the moped was seen parked at the V break in the wall at the supposed time of the murder. Perhaps the police were only aware that they were in the area and not the fact that they were seen so close to the scene of the crime? This is a very early newspaper report after all.

What are your thoughts on it?

Re: Luke Mitchell Theories
« Reply #44 on: June 14, 2019, 05:21:21 PM »
Baz, you said people had been linked via DNA. We know SK was one of these.  Any idea who the other people were?
« Last Edit: June 14, 2019, 05:25:48 PM by TheArmchairDetective »