I’ve been thinking about that alleged sighting of the boys’ moped being propped at the V riderless at approx the same time as the murder. How is it possible to see that from BTH or indeed driving along N’battle rd? Who exactly started this story? Who was this eyewitness? Was it used in evidence? And on the subject of JF, a second cousin of the Jones family, I found a link to an article stating that he said that this moped was propped at the V around the time of the murder and that he and GD were at the locus at the time, too. Said article also mentions that JF said he was ostracised by the Joneses, wasn’t welcome at Alice Walker’s house any more and that JOSJ was going to batter him. I also understand that Shane Mitchell had threatened JF around the time of the trial, as well. Perhaps more significantly, the article also states that he moved away from Dalkeith to Ayrshire around the time of the trial. Can anyone explain all of this? Bearing in mind that this guy was also well known to police (had convictions for drugs, motoring and violence offences), and wasn’t the most punctual or reliable coming forward to facilitate the police in their investigation, repeatedly gave police inaccurate info in regards to timings and his whereabouts on the afternoon of 30.06.03 (fed the police with evasive “I don’t knows” and “I can’t remembers”), cut his own hair only 2 or 3 days after the murder (supposedly because he didn’t like curly hair) and had the aforementioned moped crushed and destroyed not long after the murder. Why JF, GD and the moped all weren’t seized, examined and thoroughly investigated immediately beggars belief (hindsight’s a great thing, though).
https://www.scotsman.com/news/ex-drug-dealer-denies-he-was-behind-murder-cousin-jodi-2509760
So, no direct admission from [Name removed] in statements that the bike was against the wall at 5.15pm
I'm sure you have. - First the boys have never admitted to this bike being up against this V break. JF said in reply in court "I dunno" - paper not accurate here. They admitted to being on the path, of course they did. And I am sure you have already read the many posts on who said this. It was the same witness from BTH - who went from saying the boys were in the yard with their moped. To then saying a bike with no people in sight. - so it changed from boys and moped to bike and no people. And note above, "no direct admission from [Name removed] in statements that the bike was against the wall at 5.15pm" - not the V but the wall. He never admitted to anything.
Let's again chuck this in the bin where it belongs. The witness was the employee from BTH. So as above. Went from boys on moped to bike with no people in sight - and that approx of time at around 5.15pm Now we know the boys were being chased from the tool hire place after 5pm. It was after the employee was leaving for the day. The place closed at 5pm. Does not mean they were out of here at the same time.
After the boys on the moped passed through the tool hire place, an employee there told police that s/he spotted the bike parked against the V break (with no people in sight) on the witness's drive home.
To this witness who saw the boys with the bike pushing it into RDP. Given that approx: of just after 5. Now we know this is slightly later. Two things. The time to push this bike out of BTH. The time to push it uphill to the entrance of this path. And of LK. Entering this path around 5.10pm - none saw the other on RDP itself. The boys entered this path after LK.
a witness driving up the Newbattle Road saw them pushing the bike into the entrance of Roan's Dyke path just after 5pm.
And we can revert back to the employee who spotted the bike and morphed into against the V break with no people in sight. Wouldn't it be good to actually see that statement Mr Apples? From this witness who was not called to court. It was an account given and one which was used to put the appeal out for the boys to come forward. And of this no direct admission from [Name removed] of the bike against the wall - for a bike was seen with no people "close" to where there is a V break. - We know this as you can not see the V from any road. Not simply due to the distance but due to the inequitable fact - that the V can not be seen. It is sheltered by a line of trees on the field side of this path.
Therefore the best one could do, with any bike sighting it to give an idea as to where on the path it was. And the one person we do know, who was in sight at this point in time - was LK. On his bike. Whom around 5.15pm had stopped cycling, as he heard noises from the woodland. He stopped to listen. Very much where the rustling became strangling sounds - And they stopped and he went on his way. For there is no moped mentioned or boys. There is bike and people. And from the expanse of this field. To this car driving in a national speed limit zone. How deceptive can the eye be here of movement. Of making out this wall in the backdrop of this bike. Of it appearing to be against the wall, as opposed to the seeing the bike actually leaning onto the wall. Sure you get the drift here? - it is just not possible, to firstly see any V, and to make out any bike actually resting against the wall itself. It is extremely difficult to make people out also. - Of anything appearing to be moving whilst one is physically moving themselves, in a car. And we know LK had stopped up from this V break and not at it - where the line of trees on the field side stop. Where one may come into view.
And of the rest. Of this drugs, motoring and violence offences - proof of this young 15yr old lad at the time of the murder having any of these offences against his name Mr Apples? Why do you suppose it is always JF that is brought up? And of Findlay trying to trip him up with the same nonsense. Of asking him about the bike up against this wall and of his "I dunno" - Why do you suppose GD is barely mentioned in all of this? - Where are the AD questions to BOTH these boys? We know GD is mentioned by Ms Lean. Of Findlay asking him if he were due in court for any other offences? - those typical tactics. As we know with GD there was one for violence.
Back to the actual facts of these boys on the day in question and the time they were on RDP onto LP.
They entered this path around 5.10pm. The bike was playing up. They were pushing it. They came into sight around 5.20pm. Up above that line of trees. They got their bike going. They rode it up and down and onto LP a couple of times - they arrived back in GD at 5.30pm. The clock did say 4.30pm. It was an hour out. Regardless. They were witnessed arriving home at this time. So we have this approx 20mins. So they were right in the time on these paths of being this.
there was only time, at the end of that, to ride the bike "a couple of times" up and down the path before getting back to [Name removed]'s house about 5.30pm.
He stated, in this statement, that they were on the path "maybe 20 minutes,"
See. The bike was not up against this V. The boys had not disappeared into any woodland. The police knew all of this and they knew the real time of being on this actual path. - Why then Mr Apples? Would they want to take this bike for any forensic examination? - Think about it? People are being led down these various, proverbial garden paths - On this whim of tiny fragment of truth. And you did hit the nail on the head with his hair, of being curly. On top. - Not long, not down his neck, shoulder nor back - it was unruly. And of the wet gloves with the condom inside, in his sisters house. He said hidden from his niece - to do with the condom? So work away with this duo of every piece of suspicious behaviour. It does not change the fact that the bike was not up at this V, that there is not proof to it being so. That they were not on these paths any longer than 20mins. That there was no arranged meet or opportunity for them to have met Jodi. To get her into an area of woodland where she was initially attacked to then meet her death.
Or on can go on the person she was meeting. That he was ID at the lane leading to this woodland strip. That Jodi and Luke did frequent this woodland strip. That they were having a joint, out of prying eyes. That his time scale is from around five to five until 5.38pm. That there were multiple areas of DNA found and that law of averages towards being LM's. That there was nothing from these boys at all. No grime, not oil, nothing at the actual locus itself. That they somehow miraculously. Met Jodi. Got her into those woods. All and everything in the space of less than 20mins - for them to arrive home and get their parents to cover up for them?
So what does beggar belief is how gullible people actually are: - And they are. For they have JF as the person sighted by AB due to the length and clumpy out hair - Ms Lean by the way. Who lies here by stating LM's hair was poker straight and blonde - it was not, it very much appeared to be clumped and sticking out at his neck - exactly how his picture is. Exactly how AB described it. Of this sandy colour. This dirty blonde hair in the shade of those trees in that lane. Beggars belief to believe it was LM? but not - JF transporting himself from not being on the bike. To cutting his hair to look like someone else. To make it shorter in length to match the person on the bike. - what a lot of bollocks. And the bollocks just keep on expanding.
We can see the mess with trying to tie these boys in. And to try and tie [Name removed] in. With these absolutely no confirmed sightings of Jodi heading towards RDP on the day in question - And again people just keep soaking this nonsense up - there were no confirmed sightings of this girl. Full stop. They would have been used. And Ms Lean just trips herself up, makes a fool of herself. Claiming the police were shoe horning times together - well they could easily have shoe horned that time together - her ever so vital 8mins apart. - bollocks. Crazy strawman argument. As with the V break in the wall - did not happen and there were no confirmed sightings of Jodi Jones - no mystery man - It was a false trail. But desperate measures must be had. - To distract away from LM.
