Why doesn't Shane Mitchell speak out if his brother is innocent?

[faithlilly]

This question will never go away. As long as they continue with the story of alibi, burning pie SM taking his upstairs, then the question will always remain. And now it has been brought into the limelight on national TV, more questions need answered.

This he should be left alone stuff, does not wash with me any more. I would agree, if this rule applied to the others, who's names were splashed all over national TV and on many podcasts on YouTube. But it seems like one rule for one.

The fact of the matter is, SM failed to corroborate the story of alibi under oath. Game over.

So it’s tit for tat is it? Rather an immature way to look at things.

Failed to corroborate rather than denying Luke was there. There is an ocean of difference between the two.

[faithlilly]

Have you read the statements Faithlilly - JuJ's, all of JaJ's, Jodi's friends? All of the evidence led in court?  In fact, have you read everyone's statements?

Common sense yet again would tell us - That if a person uses one or two small areas from multiple statements to show as proof that something was
"demonstrably" untrue then your demonstrably untrue is Poppycocks.

AS;

Where are AT's questions to these witnesses? - where are these witnesses answers? Why are they not shown?

Relatively simple common sense here - both have access to everything, it's called fair play - it's called a trial.

Why was the very factor of "not using this path" introduced by these witnesses in their statements?

So if you have knowledge of "all" of the statements, their full context - then you will be able to answer these two questions.

Had Jodi Jones been told by her mother not to use the path alone?

Lets's again use more common sense here and ask - why did Jodi's mother not want her to use this path?

The obvious answers yet again by using just a fraction of common sense is - yes and reason's to why would have been given, as, 

Common sense yet again - Information is given, the police ask questions around it, answers are given.

So, I had said Jodi had been prohibited from using the path - this is true is it not, and again, if you have access to everything you will know that there is further verification of this from other witnesses?

LM would have known that this ban was in place - true.

LM most definitely did claim not to be near/at  Roansdyke path at all until late that night.

Specifically so - by stating that he had at point point walked as far as "Barrondale cottage" an no further.


Assumptions? - LM claimed to have left his house at 5.30

LM met with the boys in the Abbey at 7.30pm approx:

Two hours.  - there are no assumptions here, these are times given by himself and verification from the boys of the time of meeting as 7.30.
approx:


Two hours. Witnessed by F&W at the gate just yards from the entrance to this path.  appox: 5.40pm

Nothing for approx 20mins:  Is there enough time here for LM to get home, a quick change of jkt and shoes and be at the entrance of the estate for the next sighting at 6pm? 20mins

It took LM 7-mins to get from his house to the path later that night  So even IF he had went down Newbattle R'd, easily done in around 10mins. But common sense would tell us he needed just a little bit more time.

There is, and this is no assumption yet again - a shortcut through the woods which take you out into the bottom half of the estate in which he stayed.
Off of Newbattle R'd.  LM stayed in the bottom half of this estate.

6pm until 6.15pm approx : there are three sightings of LM around the estate entrance, two by boys from school one a motorist.

Then nothing - for 1hr and 15mins approx: Do you not find this surprising?

IF as the prosecution contend - the sighting by F&W was just after the murder, at the gate.

Then three sightings in the space of about 15mins where the contention is of putting alibi in place - to be seen

It fits perfectly does it not? as, If he had in fact been on this Road and just into the Abbey for nearly 120mins he would have been seen far more times?

The Abbey is not just a college it is also grounds to an industrial estate. So not just the traffic from Newbattle R'd to contend with but also that of those coming and going from this Abbey.

But Jodi did use the path, alone, and her sister has verified that. Further it is obvious that if JaJ knew that Jodi walked the path alone so would Luke.

And, admittedly, you do tell a good tail but unfortunately your evidence is lacking.

The eyewitness evidence is problematic to say the least. AB said the jacket Luke was wearing was not a parka, F&W disagree and how the identification by F&W was allowed to be introduced in court considering it provenance heaven alone knows.

[Rusty]

Then nothing - for 1hr and 15mins approx: Do you not find this surprising?

I always wondered if he went back to the body.

[Nicholas]

I always wondered if he went back to the body.

It’s very possible he did - the next door neighbour saw him walk past the window at around 10pm

Evidence of the Mitchell’s next door neighbour Mr Frankland
‘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

[Brietta]

I always wondered if he went back to the body.

I think that is possible for two reasons

• some of the mutilation of Jodi's body was carried out post mortem
• making sure he hadn't overlooked anything which might link him to the scene

[faithlilly]

I think that is possible for two reasons

• some of the mutilation of Jodi's body was carried out post mortem
• making sure he hadn't overlooked anything which might link him to the scene

How ‘post’ is post mortem?
Something that linked him to the scene? What like DNA? Well he certainly scrubbed the scene well and managed to leave the DNA of others.

[Nicholas]

I think that is possible for two reasons

• some of the mutilation of Jodi's body was carried out post mortem
• making sure he hadn't overlooked anything which might link him to the scene

⬇️

Could the saliva from the crime have come from Mia when Luke took her out for a walk earlier in the night?

How many witnesses reported seeing Luke Mitchell taking Mia out for a walk ?

[Rusty]

I think that is possible for two reasons

• some of the mutilation of Jodi's body was carried out post mortem
• making sure he hadn't overlooked anything which might link him to the scene

I agree. As Parky has explained. There is time unaccounted for, throughout that evening. He had unfinished business to attend to, at the body IMO.

[Brietta]

⬇️
How many witnesses reported seeing Luke Mitchell taking Mia out for a walk ?

"Could the saliva from the crime have come from Mia when Luke took her out for a walk earlier in the night?"

I don't have in depth knowledge of the forensics taken from Jodi and the scene except that there was none which wouldn't have been expected to be there which rather negates the desperation there has been to link numerous named individuals or strangers to the crime.

It has always been my opinion that by ensuring that he was present with her relations when Jodi's remains were found Luke's intention was to get more satisfaction by witnessing and enjoying their reaction and distress.

Perhaps having the dog with him when finding Jodi might have served to explain any hair or pawprints she might have left on an earlier occasion but I've not given it any thought and therefore have no idea if anything like that happened.

[Nicholas]

"Could the saliva from the crime have come from Mia when Luke took her out for a walk earlier in the night?"

I don't have in depth knowledge of the forensics taken from Jodi and the scene except that there was none which wouldn't have been expected to be there which rather negates the desperation there has been to link numerous named individuals or strangers to the crime.

It has always been my opinion that by ensuring that he was present with her relations when Jodi's remains were found Luke's intention was to get more satisfaction by witnessing and enjoying their reaction and distress.

Perhaps having the dog with him when finding Jodi might have served to explain any hair or pawprints she might have left on an earlier occasion but I've not given it any thought and therefore have no idea if anything like that happened.

‘White stains’ are referred to here https://m.imgur.com/9CToK*

And there’s reference to ‘saliva’ here https://m.imgur.com/uzKcB*

(Source: http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg332084.html#msg332084)

*Note:No idea if these diagrams are accurate btw

[Nicholas]

I agree. As Parky has explained. There is time unaccounted for, throughout that evening. He had unfinished business to attend to, at the body IMO.

If you listen to Corrine Mitchell’s interview with James English although she says he was gone
“Two seconds” she appears to be suggesting Luke was out of the house with Mia at around 10pm or even when he phones JuJ’s at 10.40

Corrine states:
“So it’s must have been his curfew was 10 same as herself it must have been around about 9ish or something like that and he arrived home and I went gosh you’re early and he went has Jodi not been and I went no has she phoned no ugh wonder where the hell she is I went Luke she’s a young girl she’ll be in somebodies house yipping and completely forgot I said boyfriends come way down the line when it comes to wee girls talking um um eh

So then he got a phone call from Jodi’s mother and no he got a text right toad get up the road you’re grounded because by this time it’s past her curfew so he phoned her and said she’s not here so she said what do you mean she’s not here she never came down he said I’ve been with my friends and she’s never come down my mum says she’s not been at the door so she went well I’m gonna phone round all her friends and all the rest of it so left it at that and then there was another phone call and Luke came to me and went mum erm Judas organising a search party were going out looking for her I went not at this time of night you’re not young man

and he went I’m going out looking for her end of no argument so I went well you’re taking the dog so cos this time it was late so off he went and

he’d taken Mia out cos I said go and save your mums old legs and take madam out for her last pee for the evening and he was away two seconds of course by this time he’d got the phone call from Judy

(Starts at approx 6:00 during James English interview)

[Nicholas]

It’s very possible he did - the next door neighbour saw him walk past the window at around 10pm

Evidence of the Mitchell’s next door neighbour Mr Frankland
‘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

What was Mitchell doing outside at 10pm if it was his curfew and if he was out with Mia when he was contacted by JuJ’s this takes the time to around 10.40

The “two seconds” Corrine refers to is looking more like 40 minutes

[Nicholas]

If Corrine claims to have told Luke he’s not going out ” at this time of night” but indicates he’s out walking Mia when he’s contacted by JuJ - he’s already out “at this time of night” - 10.40pm


She appears to have feigned concern

So when Luke took Mia out for her last walk of the evening did he do so without taking a torch?

[Paranoid Android]

• some of the mutilation of Jodi's body was carried out post mortem

[/b]

Is this definitely true?

[Brietta]

Is this definitely true?

Pathologist Prof Busuttil concluded deep cuts on her left breast and right arm had been inflicted after death, as well as detailing the killer wounds.

It is very definitely true had it not been, I would not have posted it as the fact it is as reported at Michell's trial.