"Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean

[mrswah]

It's also what Luke said. "She liked that top, she like, she bought some of her own stuff, I mean, the clothes, the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night. I think they were borrowed off her sister." Even though he said he hadn't seen her that night.

No doubt, Jodi often borrowed clothes from her sister, and Luke knew that.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Glory hunter comes to mind rather than crime expert.

Is there an element of "fatal attraction" at play also I wonder...?

[Rorschach]

I hope he does. Let’s get to the bottom of his DNA profile being the only identified profile on Jodi’s clothing, a DNA profile from semen.

I’d buy popcorn for that one.

We've already gotten to the bottom of it. The police got to the bottom of it, Jodi's family got to the bottom of it, even Luke told the police it was her sister's shirt. The jury was presented with the information and accepted the explanation. Everyone accepts the explanation because it really is the only realistic explanation like Parky said considering how little there was. For it to be the result of ejaculation at the scene is impossible.

Also does the fact his alibi for the entire day was his Jodi's sister mean anything to you? Is she covering up for a (at the time) relatively new boyfriend for raping/murdering her little sister? What planet do you live on?
Also they divorced over 11 years ago so you would think this would disrupt this murder pact you allege they have.

[faithlilly]

It's also what Luke said. "She liked that top, she like, she bought some of her own stuff, I mean, the clothes, the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night. I think they were borrowed off her sister." Even though he said he hadn't seen her that night.

Where is this from?

[WakeyWakey]

Where is this from?

iirc these were excerpts of Luke's statements to the police (Transcript of Interview, 4th July 2003:), reproduced verbatim by sandra on the blue forum:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.1740.html

[faithlilly]

Such a mess of mismatched one liners to add weight to nothing. The fairy tale gets worse, does it not?

Let's take an example of one liners from these first statements.

LM - I walked passed a V in the wall, some distance and my dog jumped up and started air sniffing
SK - We were at  a V in the wall.
JaJ- When we got to a V in the wall.

See the massive difference there already Faithlilly - it is all very well Ms Lean extracting one liners from statements of a 1000 words, they don't tell us anything outwith what Ms Lean may want to add - couple of arms and legs here and there. Red flag to the police however.

Let us expand. LM  not only states that his dog was "air sniffing" he also states that his dog had reacted "parallel to where Jodi lay on the other side"
This girl was actually around 40ft away from the V in the wall. Passed it on the woodland side.

SK in his first statement - "the dogs head was level with the V" It was dark, there is absolutely no way SK could have given any type of comparison of the dogs head being level with the V if it was where LM said it was.

But all red herrings from Ms Lean - it was not about the dog, it was about where LM said he was, the description he gave least not the biggest red flag of all, the time factor.

10mins - that is all it took, from the search party meeting next to this high school, for LM to keep the lead, to climb the wall well before the V and look into the woodland. None of the other members of the search party gave the woods a second thought. To then come to this V, at and around the actual V itself, LM climbed over the wall and turned left. SK and JaJ had barely walked a few feet when he shouted he had found something.

Let us be real here - The best search teams in the world even with professionally trained dogs - could never have found Jodi Jones in this time frame. 10mins. Not a dog walker or anyone else in the woodland that night - in daylight saw or found this girl - she was ultimately well hidden, behind and wait for it, another extraction from LM's first statements.

"I saw what I thought was a Taylors dummy, behind a large OAK tree, I could see a red bobble in it's hair" He made out the type of tree, and a bobble that even the pathologist  did not come across at first.

All this in 10mins - from LM who further claimed he did not know of the existence of this V prior to that night. He had walked this path many times in daylight.
All this in 10mins - from LM who further claimed he had never been in this woodland before that night. Really?

These claims of DNA in full profiles of an unknown male - Not multiple DNA profiles from multiple unknown males. This is a woodland, I wonder what DNA any of us would pick up innocently traipsing around in it - far less with what may have taken place that day.

So, no Faithlilly - It is SL who attempts to put weight to water continuously with these these claims of statements changing - do you know what clarified means?

DF - the defence team had access to everything SL had/has - Of course this was available for the Jury to hear/see. They did.

They didn't of course see any of SL's arms and legs, why would they? - The SCCRC however saw right through her when they dismissed these fairy tales.

So many words to refute one thing, all three witnesses who were with Luke that night all said in their first statements that Mia alerted to the v and they all changed those statements in court.

[faithlilly]

iirc these were excerpts of Luke's statements to the police (Transcript of Interview, 4th July 2003:), reproduced verbatim by sandra on the blue forum:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.1740.html

Thank you. So 4 days after the murder, when Luke will have been well aware what clothing Jodi had been wearing and possibly had been told who it belonged to. Still doesn’t explain why Jodi would borrow a dirty t-shirt from her sister if she had an identical one, as claimed by Judith or why there was a semen stain on it from Janine’s boyfriend, if their washing was done in different houses. Further where was Janine’s DNA if it belonged to her?

[faithlilly]

We've already gotten to the bottom of it. The police got to the bottom of it, Jodi's family got to the bottom of it, even Luke told the police it was her sister's shirt. The jury was presented with the information and accepted the explanation. Everyone accepts the explanation because it really is the only realistic explanation like Parky said considering how little there was. For it to be the result of ejaculation at the scene is impossible.

Also does the fact his alibi for the entire day was his Jodi's sister mean anything to you? Is she covering up for a (at the time) relatively new boyfriend for raping/murdering her little sister? What planet do you live on?
Also they divorced over 11 years ago so you would think this would disrupt this murder pact you allege they have.

His alibi is all over the place, with members of the family putting him in different places at the same time.

It is you that is suggesting that SK and Janine had a pact, not me though I would assume IF Janine did know something and came forward now she would not only be in trouble legally but also with her family.

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean stated on 21st Aug 2012

‘As for Joseph threatening me, I understand why Jodi's family are upset by what I do, and I always have done. I have offered to meet with Judy, and I offered to show Joseph the DNA results the day he was at my door, because I believe Jodi's family have been horribly misled and manipulated which is disgusting - lying to a grieving family, convincing them of something the police had no evidence to support, and so on is unforgivable. Of course Jodi's family have to believe Luke is guilty - the alternative is unthinkable for them.

But that does not extend to accepting the family lying about events, as Judith has now been proven  to have done. She publicly accused me of lying about Joseph threatening me, claiming, instead, that he had "visited" me to talk to me about the website, and that no threat of any description had been made. What she and Joseph did not know was that I was not alone in the house that day, but had an independent  witness, who had been visiting me when Joseph arrived at the door,  standing directly behind the door, out of sight of Joseph, who heard every word. Joseph later admitted threatening me, yet Judy's accusation came after that admission
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg116583.html#msg116583

Was the ‘witness’ Sandra referred to above a reliable witness and were they ‘visiting’ Sandra or living with her?

[Parky41]

Sandra Lean stated on 21st Aug 2012

‘As for Joseph threatening me, I understand why Jodi's family are upset by what I do, and I always have done. I have offered to meet with Judy, and I offered to show Joseph the DNA results the day he was at my door, because I believe Jodi's family have been horribly misled and manipulated which is disgusting - lying to a grieving family, convincing them of something the police had no evidence to support, and so on is unforgivable. Of course Jodi's family have to believe Luke is guilty - the alternative is unthinkable for them.

But that does not extend to accepting the family lying about events, as Judith has now been proven  to have done. She publicly accused me of lying about Joseph threatening me, claiming, instead, that he had "visited" me to talk to me about the website, and that no threat of any description had been made. What she and Joseph did not know was that I was not alone in the house that day, but had an independent  witness, who had been visiting me when Joseph arrived at the door,  standing directly behind the door, out of sight of Joseph, who heard every word. Joseph later admitted threatening me, yet Judy's accusation came after that admission
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg116583.html#msg116583

Was the ‘witness’ Sandra referred to above a reliable witness and were they ‘visiting’ Sandra or living with her?

BM perhaps? - another tale with arms and legs? SL claiming that this dude came to her house "knowing she was on her own" or thinking - Guy had telepathic powers perhaps?

[Parky41]

So many words to refute one thing, all three witnesses who were with Luke that night all said in their first statements that Mia alerted to the v and they all changed those statements in court.

Yes Faithlilly, the dispute and demonstrable difference in the statements was - where LM claimed this all happened. None of the other three members of this search party ever said the dog reacted some 40ft, up to 20yards past the V.

The dog would have been scurrying about everywhere - it was a dog.
LM had the dog up at the V - thus why the other three members mentioned this dog. At the V. AW - when she was keeping a hold of the dog.

Therefore, from those very first statements - the differences were what brought suspicion upon LM - not that they were the same. Messy.

Also, not a lot of words to say one thing - there were several points there and more.

LM claimed he knew not of the existence of this V.
LM claimed he had never been in this woodland prior to that night - initials were carved into a tree.
LM claimed he had walked some distance past the V in the wall - no he did not.
LM led the search party to the path - contrary to what SL may try to add arms and legs to.
LM claimed to have left his house after the phone call at/ around 10.52pm
LM was on this path by 10.59pm
LM was "fast and fit with a very fit dog pulling him up the path" CM podcast.
LM should have been off this path prior the search trio arriving - he was not, he held back to guide them there.
LM asked for something of this girls to use his dog to scent - there was nothing to scent.
LM made it clear he had saw nothing and searched for nothing on his route up.
LM initiated the search of the path - first by directly going there and staying on it, then by asking for something to scent, to use his dog.

The problems yet again that arise in a 'one man band' - missing out 99% of statements - trying to make futile points and adding the rest. Messy.

10mins later - LM was shouting out he had found something. This was on his second time of looking into the woodland - no claimed dog reaction there.
He had climbed the wall at the Gino spot - then again AT the V - SK and JaJ had barely walked 10ft when LM shouted he had found something, they then "backtracked"

10mins Faithlilly - As stated before, and again - the best search teams with professionally trained tracker dogs could not have achieved this.

LM was prepped and ready to offer to search - he knew this girls mother would contact him at some point.

Less that 3mins to speak to his brother by going up to his room to borrow a torch, for SM to go downstairs to locate the torch, for LM to have a conversation with his mother,
to get the dog ready and out the door - 7 mins later he is on this path. - Yet 20mins later he is still on it- not even at the top of it.

SL and CM make some sort of fairy tale about this girls family already being out searching the path - strange that, LM was on it for a good 20mins but only saw them as they approached the top end - perhaps they flew past him?  Messy.

[Nicholas]

Plus there were witnesses to smelling smoke coming from the Mitchell’s back garden at around 10pm


‘Luke Mitchell's neighbours, George Ramage, 37, and Nicholas Frankland, 41, told the court they smelt smoke coming from the back garden.
The duo said they became aware of the smell and smoke at about 2200 BST on the evening in June last year.
Mr Ramage, whose home backs onto the Mitchell family home in Newbattle Abbey Crescent, Dalkeith, said he told his wife it was a strange time for them to be having a barbeque.
Mr Frankland, the Mitchell's next door neighbour in the same street, described seeing a brick-built log burner alight in the garden on 30 June last year.
He said the burner was "typically" used by Mr Mitchell's mother.
Mr Frankland added: "It would be just before 2200 BST.
"I might have been aware of it earlier than that but I don't recall anything specific."
He had been busy doing DIY and clearing his tools away when he became aware of burning.
He told the court on Monday: "I could see it and smell it. It wasn't a food smell."
He told police he heard voices but could not definitely say who the people were.
The same night, he also saw Luke Mitchell walking in the street as he settled down to watch television at about 2200 BST. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4072447.stm


And Corrine apparently said Luke came back into the house prior to phoning JuJ - in response to her text message - right toad you’re grounded

From an old timeline
10.39pm Judy sends a text to Lukes phone, Right Toad, say goodnight toLuke. Thats you grounded for another week.
10.40pm Luke phones Judy to say he hasnt seen Jodi all night. Judy says she will call round Jodis friends. Luke returns to the house and tells his mother what Judy has said.
10.49pm Judy calls back to say Jodi is nowhere to be found, and she is calling the police. Luke says he will go up the path to look for Jodi, and if he doesnt find her, he will make his way to Judys house to decide what to do next. (This story was later changed to claim that Luke had agreed to meet the other members of the search party at the path.)

Was the ‘Luke returns to the house and tells his mother what Judy has said’ a story which had grown arms and legs at some point or was this what Corrine Mitchell said?

And if true where was he coming into the house from - the back garden maybe ?

[Nicholas]

BM perhaps? - another tale with arms and legs? SL claiming that this dude came to her house "knowing she was on her own" or thinking - Guy had telepathic powers perhaps?

The police will know who it was if Sandra Lean contacted them

[faithlilly]

Yes Faithlilly, the dispute and demonstrable difference in the statements was - where LM claimed this all happened. None of the other three members of this search party ever said the dog reacted some 40ft, up to 20yards past the V.

The dog would have been scurrying about everywhere - it was a dog.
LM had the dog up at the V - thus why the other three members mentioned this dog. At the V. AW - when she was keeping a hold of the dog.

Therefore, from those very first statements - the differences were what brought suspicion upon LM - not that they were the same. Messy.

Also, not a lot of words to say one thing - there were several points there and more.

LM claimed he knew not of the existence of this V.
LM claimed he had never been in this woodland prior to that night - initials were carved into a tree.
LM claimed he had walked some distance past the V in the wall - no he did not.
LM led the search party to the path - contrary to what SL may try to add arms and legs to.
LM claimed to have left his house after the phone call at/ around 10.52pm
LM was on this path by 10.59pm
LM was "fast and fit with a very fit dog pulling him up the path" CM podcast.
LM should have been off this path prior the search trio arriving - he was not, he held back to guide them there.
LM asked for something of this girls to use his dog to scent - there was nothing to scent.
LM made it clear he had saw nothing and searched for nothing on his route up.
LM initiated the search of the path - first by directly going there and staying on it, then by asking for something to scent, to use his dog.

The problems yet again that arise in a 'one man band' - missing out 99% of statements - trying to make futile points and adding the rest. Messy.

10mins later - LM was shouting out he had found something. This was on his second time of looking into the woodland - no claimed dog reaction there.
He had climbed the wall at the Gino spot - then again AT the V - SK and JaJ had barely walked 10ft when LM shouted he had found something, they then "backtracked"

10mins Faithlilly - As stated before, and again - the best search teams with professionally trained tracker dogs could not have achieved this.

LM was prepped and ready to offer to search - he knew this girls mother would contact him at some point.

Less that 3mins to speak to his brother by going up to his room to borrow a torch, for SM to go downstairs to locate the torch, for LM to have a conversation with his mother,
to get the dog ready and out the door - 7 mins later he is on this path. - Yet 20mins later he is still on it- not even at the top of it.

SL and CM make some sort of fairy tale about this girls family already being out searching the path - strange that, LM was on it for a good 20mins but only saw them as they approached the top end - perhaps they flew past him?  Messy.

It’s almost as if you were there...but oh wait....you weren’t. One thing I will agree with you on...the statements were messy. The first statements, which all experts agree, are the mostly likely to be true, simply did not marry with the evidence later given in court. Not opinion or interpretation but demonstrable fact. The only question after that should be why?

[Nicholas]

It’s almost as if you were there...but oh wait....you weren’t. One thing I will agree with you on...the statements were messy. The first statements, which all experts agree, are the mostly likely to be true, simply did not marry with the evidence later given in court. Not opinion or interpretation but demonstrable fact. The only question after that should be why?

Why don’t you ask Corrine Mitchell to publish her sons police statements

If so - someone pls tell her to publish Luke Mitchell’s police statements - or maybe Corrine Mitchell will publish them if Sandra Lean refuses to

‘Donald Findlay reads a statement given by Janine to police in the early hours of July 1 in which she said that 'everyone was in hysterics'.

Under cross-examination, Janine says: 'The only time Luke showed any emotion was when he was on the phone to the police and we started shouting at him and then he started to raise his voice.'

Findlay asks: 'Are you saying the police have written something wrong in the statement.'

Janine answers: 'I may have phrased it wrong. They may have taken it down wrong. I didn't mean everyone was in hysterics.

'As I said, the police have misrepresented it.'
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/THE+JODI+JONES+TRIAL%3A+'We+heard+Luke+shouting+there+was+something...-a0126045465