"Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean

[Chris_Halkides]

And here, ladies & gentlemen, is how one loses a debate. Pretend something did not exist. When there is evidence to the contrary.

I revert back to my last point > fingers in one's ears.

I have already explained to you why the evidence that you offered had little probative value.  If there were such a parka, there would be a receipt.  There would probably be a credit card statement and photographs of Mr. Mitchell wearing one prior to 30 June.  Can you produce any of these?  Can you offer anything of substance?  I am not holding my breath.

[Nicholas]

Heather Brunt
@Truth4Luke
Also, Luke tested negative for cannabis that day. Jodi tested positive, two kids who never got justice
12:01 AM · Nov 23, 2023


 

[Nicholas]

Stuart Henderson, Rachel Roll and Dani Barclay have done a video with that creepy man James Hunt who calls himself “the fly fifer”

Stuart Henderson seems to be under the impression Steven Kelly’s blood was on Jodi Jones clothing

 

[Nicholas]

Dani Barclay stated;

“Getting the transcripts isnae gonna prove anything that we don’t know and (unintelligible) court and trial, it was all lies and made up stories anyway, it’s just lies on papers so, it’s the samples, release the samples and get them tested that’s the only way that you’ll shut people up”

 

[Nicholas]

Rachel Roll stated;

“See can I point something out about Mark Kane, erm the trolls like guilters basically they say that, campaigners try and say that Mark Kane did it and that’s what Scott forbes angle was. That was never the case with Mark Kane. Mark Kane looked incredibly similar to Luke, so the point bringing Mark Kane into it was to actually to say ‘look he could have been the person at the gate that Rosemary Fleming and Lorraine Walsh’, that could have been the person they saw therefore taking their witness testimony out of it. Obviously it’s odd that he had scratches and that and he should have been looked at, that’s another way of saying the police weren’t doing their job basically and weren’t doing their job

[Nicholas]

From the BBC.

“ The accused also visited her on St Valentine's Day 2003.

Miss Thomson said Mr Mitchell was supposed to visit her last summer but this was "cancelled".

Are you saying that the witness was wrong or that a myriad of newspapers reported it incorrectly?

If sadistic murderer Luke Mitchell hadn’t cancelled his visit to see Kimberley Thomson on the 5th July 2003, how do you think that would have gone down?

[Nicholas]

Rachel Roll stated;

“See can I point something out about Mark Kane, erm the trolls like guilters basically they say that, campaigners try and say that Mark Kane did it and that’s what Scott forbes angle was. That was never the case with Mark Kane. Mark Kane looked incredibly similar to Luke, so the point bringing Mark Kane into it was to actually to say ‘look he could have been the person at the gate that Rosemary Fleming and Lorraine Walsh’, that could have been the person they saw therefore taking their witness testimony out of it. Obviously it’s odd that he had scratches and that and he should have been looked at, that’s another way of saying the police weren’t doing their job basically and weren’t doing their job

Rachel Roll stated;

“I’m not stopping this until the person who done this is in jail”


The person who “done this” IS in jail Rachel Roll and you are communicating with him

[Nicholas]

Heather Brunt
@Truth4Luke
Also, Luke tested negative for cannabis that day. Jodi tested positive, two kids who never got justice
12:01 AM · Nov 23, 2023


 

Yet sadistic murderer Luke Mitchell was smoking cannabis with David High, David Tullock and the other lad from around 7:30pm

[faithlilly]

If sadistic murderer Luke Mitchell hadn’t cancelled his visit to see Kimberley Thomson on the 5th July 2003, how do you think that would have gone down?

But he did so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make?

[Nicholas]

From the BBC.

“ The accused also visited her on St Valentine's Day 2003.

Miss Thomson said Mr Mitchell was supposed to visit her last summer but this was "cancelled".

Are you saying that the witness was wrong or that a myriad of newspapers reported it incorrectly?

If sadistic murderer Luke Mitchell hadn’t cancelled his visit to see Kimberley Thomson on the 5th July 2003, how do you think that would have gone down?

But he did so I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make?

Corinne Mitchell told police, in one of her first statements, that sadistic murderer Luke Mitchell was “intending to go to Kenmore this weekend, 5th July, to stay with C and Kimberley”

The visit was cancelled by the killer

Charlatan and fraudster Sandra Lean p.169

“The claim that he was planning to visit her again in July 2003 was based on Corinne’s plan to holiday in the same place – a plan that had since been cancelled.

 

[faithlilly]

Corinne Mitchell told police, in one of her first statements, that sadistic murderer Luke Mitchell was “intending to go to Kenmore this weekend, 5th July, to stay with C and Kimberley”

The visit was cancelled by the killer

 

One assumption from the above is that Luke’s ‘romance’ with Kimberley was cooling as his feelings for Jodi grew stronger. It is telling that he cancelled the visit.

[Nicholas]

“Transcript comparisons”
👇
https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/transcript-comparison-notes.html

What the author of the above blog is also demonstrating is that they still seem attached to the narrative told by killer Luke Mitchell and his toxic enablers

[Nicholas]

Stuart Henderson, Rachel Roll and Dani Barclay have done a video with that creepy man James Hunt who calls himself “the fly fifer”

James Hunt/fly fifer is really creepy

[Nicholas]

What the trial transcripts are demonstrating to former supporters is that scammers Sandra Lean and Scott Forbes are bare faced liars, as are Corinne Mitchell and sadistic murderer Luke Mitchell

“Transcript comparisons”
👇
https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/transcript-comparison-notes.html

The author of the above blog stated;

“When supporters of Luke Mitchell have asked about the discrepancies in the transcripts, the reply from those leading the campaign has been along the lines of that without the correct context, the sections that have been shared amount to nothing more than a lie”

The author would be better off publishing the transcripts they have paid for in full (no redactions), as opposed to being selective with what they are choosing to publish

The jury who heard all the evidence and who declared killer Luke Mitchell guilty after hearing and seeing all the evidence, did not make their decision based on small parts of a witnesses testimony.

The jury listened to each witness who was questioned by both the prosecution and the defence

The jury were not only able to see and hear the evidence, they were also able to see each witness as they answered questions put to them and gauge their reactions to each answer they gave

None of this is refelective in any mainstream media article

[Nicholas]

Rachel Roll stated;

“I’m not stopping this until the person who done this is in jail”


The person who “done this” IS in jail Rachel Roll and you are communicating with him

“I speak to Luke a lot” ~ Rachel Roll