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

[Paranoid Android]

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.

Horrific - all the more important for the person responsible to be locked up.

[Brietta]

Horrific - all the more important for the person responsible to be locked up.

The catalogue of injuries sustained by Jodi does make for horrific reading and I think had probably been the stuff of the perpetrator's phantasy for some time.

[faithlilly]

"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.

 Luke was making his way to Jodi’s mum’s house while looking for Jodi on the way. He had no idea that he would meet the other search party.

Jodi’s sister’s boyfriend’s semen wouldn’t have been expected to be at the murder site and actually on the murder victim ...but it was. Also several DNA profiles from men who haven’t been identified.

[Parky41]

Luke was making his way to Jodi’s mum’s house while looking for Jodi on the way. He had no idea that he would meet the other search party.

Jodi’s sister’s boyfriend’s semen wouldn’t have been expected to be at the murder site and actually on the murder victim ...but it was. Also several DNA profiles from men who haven’t been identified.

Glad that's that cleared up then - "not expected to be at the murder scene" No one more surprised than SK himself.

What I'm more interested in here is the usual spraff - "several DNA profiles from men who haven’t been identified."

LM - it is claimed left absolutely no DNA of himself at the crime scene - correct?

Impossible for him to have committed this murder and left no trace - correct?

Therefore - MK, GD,JF, JaF, RG, [Name removed] and the list of the other convicted people whom Ms Lean claims carried out similar attacks left none of their DNA at the crime scene - so all equally ruled out,- yes?

Let's talk about the one singular sperm head on the trainer - be a good start - yes?

And we revert back to SK - it wasn't his sperm head, his DNA profile, was it? Didn't belong to any of the others either.

But that same futile point of applying these sperm heads to the time of the murder - millions of sperm heads less than 5 sperm heads found? from multiple areas.

Which tells us with common sense and clarity - that it was not deposited at the time of this murder.

This murder took place in a woodland - On a recent You Tube blog, filmed at the actual locus in the woods there is an empty condom wrapper. - Are you surprised that there was a singular sperm head found on footwear?

JaF - when his DNA was taken it flagged up an alert - straight to this case, as the DNA obtained is stored in a data base.

Two things here, one it most certainly was not RG. (for multiple reasons) but neither was it any of the others, going by your very reasoning alone.

There is a difference between DNA being extracted to show up as being Male in origin to actually having a profile?

For example - ones with "no reportable" result. 

I'll come onto profiles - partial in particular in another post. Not  "the 20p" scenario? but the lottery one?

[Mr Apples]

Does anyone have a link that contains Shane’s statements verbatim? An official transcript or excerpts from it? Did Shane give two statements in July 2003 and then another when he was interrogated in April 2004? In his first statement  in July 2003, did he say he saw Luke in the kitchen and then subsequently change it a couple of days later, saying he couldn’t be sure if he had seen Luke in the house?

[Paranoid Android]

LM - it is claimed left absolutely no DNA of himself at the crime scene - correct?

Is it not the case that there actually was DNA from LM found, but that is was deemed inadmissible due to LM and Jodi having an intimate relationship?

[John]

Does anyone have a link that contains Shane’s statements verbatim? An official transcript or excerpts from it? Did Shane give two statements in July 2003 and then another when he was interrogated in April 2004? In his first statement  in July 2003, did he say he saw Luke in the kitchen and then subsequently change it a couple of days later, saying he couldn’t be sure if he had seen Luke in the house?

What is known is that Shane changed his first statement after failing to include information as to his own whereabouts on the day Jodi was murdered. He later admitted that his mother had influenced his first statement in respect of Luke being at home.

What is important though is his testimony in court in which he stated he did not know if Luke was at home which is another way of saying he wasn't. Clearly in such a small house two brothers would have known if the other were in the house.

If Luke was at home when Jodi was murdered why not say so?  Why all the confuscation?

(Note: Under Scots Law it is illegal to publish witness statements.)

[Paranoid Android]

I'm sure SM said that, because of what he was up to up the stairs at the time, he was actually listening for anyone coming in downstairs, as I imagine you probably would.

So, even though he was actively listening for people in the house, he still says LM wasn't there.

[Bullseye]

What is known is that Shane changed his first statement after failing to include information as to his own whereabouts on the day Jodi was murdered. He later admitted that his mother had influenced his first statement in respect of Luke being at home.

What is important though is his testimony in court in which he stated he did not know if Luke was at home which is another way of saying he wasn't. Clearly in such a small house two brothers would have known if the other were in the house.

If Luke was at home when Jodi was murdered why not say so?  Why all the confuscation?

(Note: Under Scots Law it is illegal to publish witness statements.)

I don’t think that’s really fair, Shane said he did not know if Luke was home, that’s not another way of saying he wasn’t, you could argue the opposite too on that logic, just another way to say he was.

I live in a flat and there has been a few times I thought my partner had gone out only for me to get the fright of my life when he popped his head in the door, also a number of times I thought he was in and was shouting through to him only to find out he had popped out, to garden/ shops, wherever and even called out to let me know and I did not hear.

Therefore it’s possible for someone not to be sure if another person is home imo and experience.

[John]

I don’t think that’s really fair, Shane said he did not know if Luke was home, that’s not another way of saying he wasn’t, you could argue the opposite too on that logic, just another way to say he was.

I live in a flat and there has been a few times I thought my partner had gone out only for me to get the fright of my life when he popped his head in the door, also a number of times I thought he was in and was shouting through to him only to find out he had popped out, to garden/ shops, wherever and even called out to let me know and I did not hear.

Therefore it’s possible for someone not to be sure if another person is home imo and experience.

No that doesn't cut mustard imo.  Shane clearly stated that he was looking at porn on his computer with the bedroom door open so that he would hear anyone come in. Nobody did!

Add to this the claim by Luke that he was in the kitchen cooking dinner and burnt it. Does anyone really expect us to believe that in those circumstances Shane was still sitting upstairs completely oblivious as to what was going on downstairs?  I think not.

[faithlilly]

Glad that's that cleared up then - "not expected to be at the murder scene" No one more surprised than SK himself.

What I'm more interested in here is the usual spraff - "several DNA profiles from men who haven’t been identified."

LM - it is claimed left absolutely no DNA of himself at the crime scene - correct?

Impossible for him to have committed this murder and left no trace - correct?

Therefore - MK, GD,JF, JaF, RG, [Name removed] and the list of the other convicted people whom Ms Lean claims carried out similar attacks left none of their DNA at the crime scene - so all equally ruled out,- yes?

Let's talk about the one singular sperm head on the trainer - be a good start - yes?

And we revert back to SK - it wasn't his sperm head, his DNA profile, was it? Didn't belong to any of the others either.

But that same futile point of applying these sperm heads to the time of the murder - millions of sperm heads less than 5 sperm heads found? from multiple areas.

Which tells us with common sense and clarity - that it was not deposited at the time of this murder.

This murder took place in a woodland - On a recent You Tube blog, filmed at the actual locus in the woods there is an empty condom wrapper. - Are you surprised that there was a singular sperm head found on footwear?

JaF - when his DNA was taken it flagged up an alert - straight to this case, as the DNA obtained is stored in a data base.

Two things here, one it most certainly was not RG. (for multiple reasons) but neither was it any of the others, going by your very reasoning alone.

There is a difference between DNA being extracted to show up as being Male in origin to actually having a profile?

For example - ones with "no reportable" result. 

I'll come onto profiles - partial in particular in another post. Not  "the 20p" scenario? but the lottery one?

There was an unidentified partial DNA profile that had elements of Luke’s DNA but probably half off the men in Midlothian too.

There was a full DNA profile that matched SK.

How long do sperm heads survive in the open air?

[Paranoid Android]

There was an unidentified partial DNA profile that had elements of Luke’s DNA but probably half off the men in Midlothian too.

Half the men in Midlothian? What's that supposed to mean?

[faithlilly]

Horrific - all the more important for the person responsible to be locked up.

I couldn’t agree more.

[faithlilly]

Is it not the case that there actually was DNA from LM found, but that is was deemed inadmissible due to LM and Jodi having an intimate relationship?

There was DNA from Jodi on a pair of trousers found in an overnight bag Luke took to his dad’s that was disregarded.

[Bullseye]

No that doesn't cut mustard imo.  Shane clearly stated that he was looking at porn on his computer with the bedroom door open so that he would hear anyone come in. Nobody did!

That’s where the waters turn muddy imo, it has been said he was not looking at porn it was pop ups (and other thing in Sandras book about how he was not able to clearly put his side across on the stand)  I remember back then online the pop ups where a nightmare so feel that is possible. That’s why I’d love to hear from Shane to unmuddy the water on that point, was he looking at cars or porn. I know that’s never going to happen tho.