The hard facts that prove Luke Mitchell murdered Jodi Jones in cold bloodMany - including senior police officers and Jodi’s family - are angry that the TV documentary failed to point out key facts.
ByJane Hamilton
04:30, 2 MAR 2021
A Channel 5 documentary which cast doubt on the conviction of Jodi Jones killer Luke Mitchell has thrown the 2003 murder back into the spotlight.
Luke Mitchell was convicted of killing his then-girlfriend, 14, in 2005 following a trial at the High Court in Edinburgh.
Yet in two-part series Murder in a Small Town, which aired on 24 and 25 February, Mitchell, now 32, insists he is innocent.
But many - including senior police officers and Jodi’s family - are angry that the TV documentary failed to point out key facts.
Four attempts to overturn Mitchell’s conviction have failed.
Police say they are satisfied with the outcome - and no other suspects have been identified.
Here, the Daily Record answers the then key questions often raised by those who think Luke Mitchell should be cleared.
And we explain the key evidence that convinced a jury - beyond all reasonable doubt - that Luke Mitchell killed Jodi Jones.
Why wasn’t Luke’s DNA on Jodi?Luke’s DNA was actually found on her bra and her DNA was found on Luke’s trousers but in an agreement between the Crown and his defence team, led by Donald Findlay QC, it was decided the issue of DNA wasn’t relevant as the pair were in an intimate relationship. The Crown weren’t going to say DNA made him the killer as it was expected his DNA would be on Jodi. DNA in this case wouldn’t prove innocence or guilt.
What was Luke’s alibi and why didn’t the jury believe him?Luke Mitchell’s alibi was that he was at home cooking dinner when Jodi died on June 30 2003.
But his brother Shane gave crucial evidence during the trial which cast doubt on this
Mitchell lived in Newbattle, Midlothian, with his mother Corinne and his older brother, Shane.
Luke’s mother, Corinne, gave evidence that when she returned home from work at 5.15pm that he was in the kitchen. In a statement to police on 7 July 2003 Luke’s brother Shane said he recalled seeing Luke in the kitchen “mashing tatties”.
But when Shane was questioned by police on 14 April 2004, Shane said he had been looking at porn on the internet in his bedroom and this is not something he would have done if there had been anyone else in the house at the time. This contradicted what Luke Mitchell and his mother told police.
Shane later admitted on the stand he had discussed his earlier statement with his mother before telling police Mitchell had been at home. He admitted that statement was not accurate. As the alibi was not held up in court Corinne was arrested for perjury but prosecutors made a decision not to proceed with the charges.
What about the witness who said she saw Luke and Jodi at the entrance to the path as she drove past then couldn’t pick him out in court?Andrina Bryson’s evidence was considered an important element in the Crown’s case as she came forward independently to say she saw a male and a female at the Easthouses part of Roan’s Dyke at about 1650.
She described the male as wearing a khaki green, hip-length, fishing-style jacket. Its collar was up, and it had a pocket which was bulging. She picked out a photograph of Mitchell although could not identify him at court.
She was unable to identify the female whom she only saw from the back, but gave a description of someone with black, shoulder length hair, which seemed to be contained like a ponytail, wearing a navy blue jumper with a hood and a pair of lighter trousers, which she took to be a pair of jeans. Apart from the jeans, the description fitted Jodi. The appeal court judges said that while her identification evidence was open to challenge there were elements that provided the basis for a valid identification of Mitchell as the male she had seen and Jodi as the female.
They said her evidence did not stand alone - it fitted that Jodi had left to meet Mitchell and they were in their regular ‘rendezvous’ point when spotted. The timings, they said, also fit. The prosecution claimed that had Jodi left the house and proceeded directly to the path, the she would have been there at the time of this sighting, and asked the jury to accept that this was a sighting of Jodi and Mitchell.
Two other witnesses also identified Mitchell as the young man they had seen at the Newbattle end of the path around 50 minutes later.
What is the significance of the speaking clock phone call?At 1654 Mitchell made a call to the speaking clock from his mobile. When asked by police why he had called the service when presumably if he was in his house as his alibi claimed there would be other ways to find out the time such as a clock on a wall he said he couldn’t answer why he made the call.
This piece of evidence backed up the prosecution case that he was on his way to meet Jodi at their prearranged time.
What was significant about Jodi’s body being discovered by Mitchell and the search party?Mitchell discovered Jodi’s body, which was hidden behind a wall on the path, after claiming his dog led him to the scent. Family members with him said he appeared to know where the body was. They contradicted his evidence the dog had led them to the wall. He also showed no emotion at the horrifying find.
When he was later questioned he mentioned a distinctive hair clasp which was not readily visible on Jodi’s body and his description of her clothing implied he had seen her much later than just at school as he had claimed.
What about the missing knife?At the time of the murder Mitchell owned a ‘skunting’ knife which has never been found despite an extensive search of his house. During a search of the family home many months later the pouch from the knife was found. Inscriptions on it read: “666” ‘[Name removed] 1989 – 2003” (Jodi’s birth and death).
And the missing jacket?Luke was often seen wearing a distinctive parka style jacket and it was described by witnesses who saw him that night. When police searched his house the jacket had gone.
The prosecution sought to link this with evidence that a log burner in the back garden of Mitchell’s home had been used around 6.30pm and 7.30pm and later, at around 10pm that night with an unusual smell as reported by neighbours.
The prosecution inferred the jacket had been burned to destroy evidence. The court was also told Corinne had bought her son a new jacket identical to the one that had gone missing. The prosecution said on both counts Mitchell failed to provide any kind of explanation over the missing knife and jacket when he could have done so.
What’s the connection with the Black Dahlia murder?Two days after the murder Mitchell bought a Marilyn Manson DVD, “The Golden Age of the Grotesque”, which included images of naked women tied together and subjected to a form of abduction.
Manson had an exhibition of the same name publicised on his website, which included images depicting the death of the actress Elizabeth Short, also known as “The Black Dahlia”, who was mutilated and murdered in Los Angeles in 1947.
Professor Anthony Busuttil, the pathologist who examined Jodi’s body, gave evidence that while not identical there was some similarity between the location and the injuries inflicted on Jodi and those on the actress.
Were there any other suspects or people questioned during the police investigation?Several people were questioned extensively by police and ruled out including most of the people mentioned in the documentary.
Mark Kane - who it was alleged was in the area at the same time as Jodi and had scratches on his face - was cleared of any involvement by police. His pal Scott Forbes said Kane, a student at Newbattle Abbey College at the time of the murder, had written an essay on “killing a girl in the woods”, and that a lecturer at the college could confirm this.
But John Beckett QC, for the Crown, said a statement from the lecturer “confirmed Kane wrote no such essay”.
He added that Forbes had told Kane to play along “and we will get £50,000 from the newspapers”. Kane later died and was totally ruled out as a suspect by police.
The whereabouts of all family members was examined to help develop a timeline of what happened. This is routine during all murder investigations and nobody else was considered a suspect.
What about the used condom found near Jodi’s body?Jodi was NOT sexually assaulted in any way. Mitchell’s defence team claimed the DNA in the condom belonged to another man - James Falconer - but during an appeal hearing in 2008 Donald Findlay QC, who was Mitchell’s lawyer, told the judges he was dropping any further claims about James, who had already been ruled out of any involvement by detectives investigating the murder.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/hard-facts-prove-luke-mitchell-23588583?utm_source=daily_record_newsletter&utm_campaign=daily_newsletter2&utm_medium=email
