I have to agree, a silly stunt that proved nothing.
If Luke was guilty he would, indeed, have blood on him. That last desperate fight of Jodi’s, evidenced by the blood on the branches. The removal of the clothes and the constraining of her arms...no avoiding blood contamination there.....and yet....and yet...absolutely no mention of blood contamination by RW and LF on the boy they saw standing, in his murderer’s mantle, leaning on the gate without a care in the world. Odd that. No mention of a bloodstained boy bolting across the road, trying to put as much distance between himself and the scene of his horrific crime by any of those occupants of the numerous cars passing by. Most odd.
By your reckoning and description "murderer's mantle" - Completely removes this male, whomever you may have thought him to be - as having any connection at all - to this murder. That complete distancing. Just a guy at a gate?
Not LM having just darted across this R'd becoming aware of a car. - stopping in his tracks. Not to be running, not to be hopping over beyond this gate - not to be seen as fleeing from somewhere? For this male wasn't simply leaning on this gate - this male looked up to no good. - attempting to look inconspicuous. He was seen and this sighting can not be taken away. And F&W did not see any other male, hanging around the entrance of Newbattle Abbey crescent on the wall. And of the jogger, and the Esk walkway. which is between the gate and Barondale cottage. It is only when you attempt to make time stand still can you discount the sighting of both the male and jogger together. Of bending what both said completely out of shape. - But of course, you are saying 100% that you have not read the defence papers. That you have not witnessed any of this information first hand. - You are in effect saying, you will take any little snip bits and accept this as concrete proof of anything - It is hardly surprising that you feel this case was wafer thin, and of sifting sand? - Then of course, if you have actually read all of these defence papers, please say - we all have lots of questions for you?
Are you now saying that SM possibly left home prior to 5.30pm, prior to LM. Where are his 10mins or so waiting on dinner being finished cooked, from his second statement? From saying hello to his mother on her arrival home at 5.05pm, of going upstairs for 10mins or so? of collecting dinner around 5.15pm? But his mother did not get home until after 5.15pm? Taking us to around 5.25pm - then taking his dinner upstairs to eat? Or are we fast forwarding him until around 6pm when LM was around Barondale cottages? - Stand firm, and stand true to what you say. Don't swap it around to suit? - Just stick to the truth, it was a story and LM was not at home.
Why did SM travel into Oxgangs later that evening, after 9pm to get fuel? As this is why he said he travelled there, to fuel up the car? - Are there any scrap merchants near Oxgangs that SM used? A mechanic having access to this place? Why Oxgangs for fuel? there were many other stations to get fuel? Tesco just up the road? Was SM disposing of evidence? Why was CM's car spotted elsewhere? Was SM driving it? When she claimed to be home all evening? What are these new claims that her car was at the West end of this path later that evening? only being heard now? - Why are we not hearing about these reports from these witness's who came forward? - Why is SL dismissing these as being wrong or mistaken, or idle gossip? - but asking people to consider every other piece of hearsay? Or unproven claims that the defence sought not to use - why does she feel she is somewhat superior in intelligence to every expert in their field?
Why are we not getting to see these statements from the Mitchells in full? - What is CM and SL hiding?
Has she thought about contacting any of Jodi's family, asking if they can publish their statements in full?
Far too much ambiguity around this excuse - can not publish, can publish what suits though?
These questions that have been set - Are they a test from reading her book? Come up with as many answers as possible?
Why was the bike not forensically examined when the question should be - What happened to the bike that LM swapped, that disappeared never to be seen again? - Was it taken to the above scrapyard, with the knife, and hey presto, gone? Truth much closer to home perhaps? - multiple conversations on these forums of SM being a mechanic - I asked Ms Lean and she said she was unaware that he was? - is this true or is she shimmying away from this as per? As with the V in the wall and LM. -Why did LM deny all knowledge of this V, of the woods, of carrying knives, of cannabis - of everything? - Answers to all of these lies should be given. - A campaign for truth and Justice on what exactly? One needs first and foremost the truth around the Mitchells. And one of those very questions is around this bike at the V - complete and utter nonsense, this is nothing more than desperation of need, to draw those claimed rag readers? Who are openly admitting they tried LM by media - kicking themselves now for being foolish. One saying that she is watching the documentary for the 10th time? She: And I quote:
LA:
I think Jodis sister has found out Jodi was sleeping with sk hence the dna on the tshirt.... Janine has went after Jodi.. Joe J (stalky man) has followed Jodi as he found out Janine now knows and hes came across Janine commiting the murder the clumps of hair being pulled out by the roots is more of a bitchy fight imo moped boys have been phoned by one of them to comes help clean up the mess.
This is the level of intellect required - very similar to WW who can not say who it was? - Hope admin allows this post. I Just wanted to highlight the reasoning and intellect here - So we have JaJ going after Jodi, then [Name removed] following Jodi then he comes across one sister murdering the other? What the hell happened to JaJ who was also following her? - And this person is an admin?? Another header of this campaign?
What happened to the bike that JF saw at the East end of the path? on the school railings? Did LM return for it later that evening? Did CM or SM collect it? Did they take it to a scrapyard? All this mud slinging stemming from Ms Leans very clear and precise details of her anomalies in this case - mainly of these others. Yet again, she is doing a startling job is she not? - I wonder what this LA: above made of the red wine scenario?
