Author Topic: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean  (Read 766614 times)

0 Members and 157 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4200 on: October 24, 2023, 04:13:18 PM »
Who’s missing from this list

1. Leonard Kelly
2. Judith Jones
3. Janine Jone
4. Alice Walker
5. Steven Kelly
6. Allen Ovens
7. Ronald Miller
8. Craig Dobbie
9. John [Name removed]
10. Gordon [Name removed]
11. Susan Ure
12. Anthony Busuttil
13. Rosemary Walsh
14. Lorraine Flaming
15. Carol Heatlie
16. Marion O’Sullivan
17. Derek Hamilton
18. Andrew Holburn
19. Dean Houston
20. Grant Elliot
21. Ashleigh Coutts
22. Kimberley Thomson
23. Andrina Bryson
24. Shane Mitchell
25. Corinne Mitchell
26. Dc Alan Towers
27. Dc Stephen Quinn
28. Dc George Thomson
29. Robert Gilhooly,
30. Matthew Muraska
31. Rachel Quinn
32. Alexander Hamilton
33. Keith Campbell
34. Michelle Tierney
35. Alistair Leitch
36. David High
37. David Tullock
38. Michelle Lindsay
39. Derek Scrimger
40. Alan Murray
41. Mark Heron
42. Natalie Wright
43. Raymond McCloy
44. James Aitken
45. Patricia Frankland
46. Nicholas Frankland
47. George Ramage
48. Geraldine Mackie
50. Male teacher who commented on killer Luke Mitchell looking like a “hooded monk” in his now missing khaki green parka style coat
51. DI William Cravens
52. Laura Wightman - paragraphs from Laura’s July 2003 & September 2004 witness statements read to jury
53. Dc Brian Melrose
54-56. 3 witnesses who supported Leonard Kelly’s evidence
57. The witness who was an employee for the firm of solicitors representing killer Luke Mitchell
58. Colin - a manager from Flip Inc
59. Ben Sole
60. DI Tom Martin
61. Dc Rory Hamilton
62. David Stirling
63. David Suttie
64. Derek Morris
65. Pathologist report for defence
66. Dc Adam Brunton
67. Jonathan Whitaker
68. Pc Anita Dow
69. Dc Stephen Livingston
70. DI Tom Martin
71. Dr Kranti Hiremath

Did Steven Kelly’s father give evidence during the trial?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Kenmair

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4201 on: October 24, 2023, 09:38:12 PM »
If scammer Sandra Lean is alleging she has about 80% of the trial transcripts - why didn’t she use £12,000 of the donations from her book sales to obtain the other 20%?

Lean's lies and elaborate mistruths are gradually being dismantled over a number of social media outlets without reply.

She will always have the support of a few conspiracy theorists and deluded goths, but her mistake in letting Forbes off the leash has backfired when they can't agree basic timelines, yet he claims she fact checked his book.

She is quite happy for this to rumble on as long she can keep in the albeit diminishing public eye, aye.

« Last Edit: October 24, 2023, 10:09:35 PM by KenMore »

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4202 on: October 24, 2023, 11:06:20 PM »
Lean's lies and elaborate mistruths are gradually being dismantled over a number of social media outlets without reply.

She will always have the support of a few conspiracy theorists and deluded goths, but her mistake in letting Forbes off the leash has backfired when they can't agree basic timelines, yet he claims she fact checked his book.

She is quite happy for this to rumble on as long she can keep in the albeit diminishing public eye, aye.

Yep - and many more people are seeing through Sandra Lean’s bare faced lies

She’s lost more of her moderators and admins on that Facebook group by the looks of it and I don’t suppose it’ll be too long before the trial transcripts are finally published
« Last Edit: October 24, 2023, 11:11:00 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 Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4203 on: October 24, 2023, 11:22:39 PM »
Kerry Tremble Kevan
 I was listening to the Bob Ruff podcast last night part 6 with Dr Lean & totally shocked to hear the part with SK screaming down the phone to the police along thelines "where the hell are you's, we phoned an hour ago" when that time frame hadn't passed & but seems to tie into the strange call claiming to be JuJ before jodi was even found.

Sandra Lean
It's very strange, Kerry. He said, in full, "We phoned them an hour ago.

There is nothing “strange” about the 10:45pm phone call to the police - this is when Judith Jones reported her daughter Jodi Jones missing

They were in the mother's house - they were supposed to be meeting us here." Let me compare that with all the other, known evidence.

(1) The police arrived in JuJ's house at 23.18. She told JaJ this on the phone. According to JaJ, she took that call while the search trio were still in "the complex" - still at least 5 mins from the entrance to the path, with (what should have been) no knowledge that they would be going DOWN the path or finding Jodi there.

Problems with SK's comments

There are zero “problems” with Steven Kelly’s comments

- this was only 26 minutes before his 999 call, claiming they called "an hour ago." No-one could have known "an hour ago"

Judith Jones telephoned the police at 10:45pm

what time the police would arrive at JaJ's house. There could have been no arrangement to "meet us here" (e.g. where Jodi was found) at 23.18 because (a) they weren't there and (b) no-one should have known that Jodi's body would be found, behind the wall, west of the V break, 15 minutes later.

(2). The first point at which the police had any clue where they were, or that "something" had been found, was in Luke's 999 call at approximately 11.35 and the almost immediate police call back at 11.38 to check their whereabouts.

Killer Luke Mitchell’s “whereabouts” was still on the other side of the wall - standing in his crime scene

These calls are 9 and 6 minutes, respectively, before SK's 999 call at 11.44. No arrangement could have been made for the police to "meet them there" at 11.35, because the police had no idea where "there" was. So, it could only have been in the 11.38 call that such an arrangement could be made.

This is yet more of scammer Sandra Lean’s ramblef..kery

But, the first 2 - 3 minutes of that call are nothing but confusion -

Understandably

the police are at the opposite end of Lady path and the 999 operator is trying to figure out where Luke (and Luke alone - he doesn't appear to know there are others there)

Was killer Luke Mitchell still standing on the other side of the wall in his crime scene

Why didn’t he tell the 999 operator the other three were on the other side of the wall 🙄 


is, in relation to where the two officers are. That takes us to at least 11.40 - just 4 minutes before SK's call saying there was an arrangement for the police to meet them "there."

🙄

In reality, Luke has just finished telling them "we've found something" and the operator has just finished relaying "the laddie's in a bit of a panic - he's saying he's found something, he won't say what," when SK dials 999 and says, "It's a body - tell them it's a f**king body." So any "arrangement to meet" anyone at Roan's Dyke path

Steven Kelly did not say roans dyke path

was still in the process of being made at 11.44 when SK made his 999 call.

(3) How could the police be "supposed to be meeting us here" when they appeared to have no knowledge, whatsoever, that the other 3 searchers were there? Any arrangement, however confused, was to locate and meet LUKE,

No - killer Luke Mitchell said he would search the path then head to Judith Jones house 🙄

 not a "search party". The only number they had was Luke's. The only reference they made in their calls with the operator was to Luke. The operator relayed Luke's call in the singular - he says, he's in a panic, he's found something. And, when they arrive at the V break, the first officer radios in " there are three other people here - the granny, the sister and the sister's boyfriend. I think HE's found it." So clearly, right up to the point where they arrive at the V break, those officers had no idea there was anyone other than Luke there. But SK would have the 999 operator

 (and the rest of us) 🙄

The same Steven Kelly Sandra Lean and Corinne Mitchell were pretending in 2010 was following Jodi Jones 🙄

believe there was an arrangement to meet THEM at the V "an hour ago"

Around “an hour ago” was when the police were first called

 - 50 minutes before Jodi's body was found and before it was even confirmed that Jodi was actually "missing"

10:15pm-10:20pm is when Judith Jones first contacted killer Luke Mitchell

 (since, exactly 59 minutes prior to that call, when the "mystery" call was being made reporting Jodi "missing", her mother had just started a call with Jodi's gran to check if Jodi had been at her gran's, instead of with Luke - she was still on that call while the missing person call was ongoing).

When you remember that every single one of them - JuJ, [Name removed], SK, JoF, AW - had Jodi "missing" before it was known she hadn't been with Luke (only JaJ got the original timing of her mother's call to the Gran's, looking for Jodi, correct), you really do have to wonder what the truth is.


Not if you know some of the basic facts you don’t Sandra

🙄

The police were first called at 10:45pm - which would have been around “an hour ago

Steven Kelly was correct

TIMELINE Of Almost 15 Year Old Scottish Teenage Killer Luke Mitchell’s Murder (Part 174)
👇
http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2023/04/09/30th-june-2003-timeline-of-14-year-old-killer-luke-mitchells-murder-part-174/

Scammer Sandra Lean is now labelling Judith Jones’s 10:45pm telephone call to the police, to report her daughter Jodi Jones missing, as a “mystery call”?!

She’s also concocted a second “stocky” man

And this blog 👇 has been written by someone who obviously supports the killer but the author has recognised one of Sandra Lean’s bare faced lies

”The Luke Mitchell trial transcripts”

https://justiceforlukemitchell.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-luke-mitchell-trial-transcripts_20.html
« Last Edit: October 24, 2023, 11:59:57 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 faithlilly

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4204 on: October 24, 2023, 11:50:00 PM »
Lean's lies and elaborate mistruths are gradually being dismantled over a number of social media outlets without reply.

She will always have the support of a few conspiracy theorists and deluded goths, but her mistake in letting Forbes off the leash has backfired when they can't agree basic timelines, yet he claims she fact checked his book.

She is quite happy for this to rumble on as long she can keep in the albeit diminishing public eye, aye.

‘A number of social media outlets? Like the BBC or Channel 5 you mean? No, of course you don’t. You mean WTF and Nicholas’s stream of consciousness blog, don’t you?

‘when they can't agree basic timelines’…back to WTF and Nicholas again? Nicholas believes Judith’s first phone call to Luke was at 10.20 while WTF has it pegged at 10.40 ( the actual time).

Of course we also have the two Americans Brown and Glass but it’s obvious from listening to even a few minutes of their vlogs that they don’t have a true understanding of the intricacies of this case.
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 Kenmair

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4205 on: October 25, 2023, 12:01:18 AM »
‘A number of social media outlets? Like the BBC or Channel 5 you mean? No, of course you don’t. You mean WTF and Nicholas’s stream of consciousness blog, don’t you?

‘when they can't agree basic timelines’…back to WTF and Nicholas again? Nicholas believes Judith’s first phone call to Luke was at 10.20 while WTF has it pegged at 10.40 ( the actual time).

Of course we also have the two Americans Brown and Glass but it’s obvious from listening to even a few minutes of their vlogs that they don’t have a true understanding of the intricacies of this case.

Are the BBC or Ch5 social media? The fact remains Lean & Forbes have contradicted themselves despite quoting each other and are unable to confirm basic "facts" that they claim support their claim that someone else committed the murder. Keep clinging onto Lean's (or Forbes) coat tails. If that's LM's best hope then he is destined to be locked up for the rest of his days.

But what about the moped boys witness and the Birmingham si.........


Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4206 on: October 25, 2023, 12:01:31 AM »

Nicholas believes Judith’s first phone call to Luke was at 10.20

No I don’t
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4207 on: October 25, 2023, 12:06:23 AM »
while WTF has it pegged at 10.40

No he doesn’t!

The picture of the mobile phone clearly displayed the time as being 10:20pm

At around 9:03 here ➡️ https://youtu.be/OcedqPxuR9k?feature=shared
« Last Edit: October 25, 2023, 12:08:59 AM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline faithlilly

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4208 on: October 25, 2023, 12:13:30 AM »
No I don’t

Apologies that should have been text.

‘Judith Jones texted killer Luke Mitchell at 10:20pm - he waited 18 to 20 minutes to call Judith’

Of course everyone, but Nicholas, agrees that it was 10.40.
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: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4209 on: October 25, 2023, 01:10:09 AM »
Apologies that should have been text.

‘Judith Jones texted killer Luke Mitchell at 10:20pm - he waited 18 to 20 minutes to call Judith’

Of course everyone, but Nicholas, agrees that it was 10.40.

Scammer Sandra Lean claims it was 10:38

At 10:38pm, while he was taking his dog, Mia, out for her last walk of the evening, Luke received a text from Judith’s phone, clearly intended for Jodi” p.37 (IB)
« Last Edit: October 25, 2023, 01:13:59 AM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4210 on: October 25, 2023, 01:25:23 AM »
Apologies that should have been text.

‘Judith Jones texted killer Luke Mitchell at 10:20pm - he waited 18 to 20 minutes to call Judith’

Of course everyone, but Nicholas, agrees that it was 10.40.

Scammer Sandra Lean

10:40pm: When Luke called Judith and told her he hadn’t seen Jodi all evening, the call lasted just over two minutes (ending at 10:42:40) and was the call in which it was agreed by all parties that both Judith and Luke discovered that Jodi had been out of contact for almost six hours. p.138 (IB)
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4211 on: October 25, 2023, 08:59:42 AM »
If that's LM's best hope then he is destined to be locked up for the rest of his days.

Is the prison service monitoring killer Luke Mitchell’s behaviour - especially in relation to females - including his sister?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4212 on: October 25, 2023, 11:46:41 AM »
Killin' Time 14-The C Word(not that one)
👇
https://youtu.be/MLjcV2ZvZz4?feature=shared
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4213 on: October 25, 2023, 04:57:54 PM »
Scammer Sandra Lean claims it was 10:38

At 10:38pm, while he was taking his dog, Mia, out for her last walk of the evening, Luke received a text from Judith’s phone, clearly intended for Jodi” p.37 (IB)

In 2017 scammer Sandra Lean had “the known facts” of killer Luke Mitchell taking Mia the dog out for a walk at 10:20pm-10:30pm

Here are the known facts - Luke returned home at 9.30pm (based on testimony from the other boys he was hanging around with that night.) He took Mia out for her last walk at around 10.20 - 10.30 - it was during this walk that he received JuJ's text intended for Jodi.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg386928.html?PHPSESSID=k0k3qqrjq8iql4l3p74bsg2430#msg386928

 *&^^&
« Last Edit: October 25, 2023, 05:04:40 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 Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4214 on: October 25, 2023, 06:13:50 PM »
Scammer Sandra Lean claims it was 10:38

At 10:38pm, while he was taking his dog, Mia, out for her last walk of the evening, Luke received a text from Judith’s phone, clearly intended for Jodi” p.37 (IB)

In 2017 scammer Sandra Lean had “the known facts” of killer Luke Mitchell taking Mia the dog out for a walk at 10:20pm-10:30pm

Here are the known facts - Luke returned home at 9.30pm (based on testimony from the other boys he was hanging around with that night.) He took Mia out for her last walk at around 10.20 - 10.30 - it was during this walk that he received JuJ's text intended for Jodi.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg386928.html?PHPSESSID=k0k3qqrjq8iql4l3p74bsg2430#msg386928

 *&^^&

Beth Wodzinski
I know this is obvious but I honestly really wish that Luke hadn't taken Mia with him that night as he wouldn't have been alerted to where Jodie was!!

Sandra Lean
To make matters worse, it was Luke's mum who insisted he take the dog for "safety" - so incredibly sad, in hindsight.

Danielle Bbarclay
Janette Scott  When Luke left to help out his mum wasn't aware anything bad had even happened she insisted he take Mia so he wasn't alone. My son is twelve and I think my dog would be better protection for him rather than me  if he was out and something bad happened. Just so sad a caring and worried mum (corrine) who had done everything a good loving mum would do and yet she is the one who they painted as bad mother. Sickens me every small detail in this case :(x


Scammer Sandra Lean’s above statement was made 6 days ago

Corinne Mitchell stated to James English in May 2019 she told killer Luke Mitchell to take Mia out for her last walk of the day to “save” her legs

Now scammer Sandra Lean has re-written history yet again

The Herald reported the time of the text to be 10:41

Going by scammer Sandra Leans timing and “known facts” Killer Luke Mitchell should have been out of his by 10:41pm with his brother Shane’s torch

In reality there is no evidence any of the above actually happened

Judith Jones texted killer Luke Mitchell at 10:20pm

Where was the killer at this time and what was he doing and did he already have Mia and a torch with him when he was seen by the neighbour at 10:00pm ?






« Last Edit: October 25, 2023, 06:44:23 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation