Scrub that. Rushed response as I was heading out earlier. Which was not quite addressing your questions.
The comparison is in that of which is broadly understood. Where one of more people in the chain have breached something in law. We know all the usual/prominent areas, and we know it is virtually everyone of them that Ms Lean attempts to apply to this case. Police incompetence, eye witness testimony, unreliable witness testimony, perjury, incompetent defence, circumstantial evidence, media pressure/prejudice, human rights. Wrongful direction by the Judge and on it goes.
The one I would like to pick up on, as you highlighted before is that of Confirmation bias. It is this which I believe Ms Lean is guilty of. She made the decision that Luke Mitchell was innocent, uninvolved in the death of his girlfriend in that 7 month period of the calm before the storm. At at time when all three believed there would be no arrest. That there was and could not be evidence, the naivety and lack of understanding, around how time consuming the build up of circumstantial cases can be. That those preconceptions she had that were wrong.
One had already made their mind up, prior to knowing anything of the evidence. That at this point whilst colluding together they had built their own hypothesis around the others in this case. The mystery man, the duo, the brother and stranger. On the limited amount of information available. That Ms Leans information was added to by the Mitchell themselves. Of Luke's relationship with the duo and the Jones family.
That when that arrest did come around, she sought information to support the hypotheses already in place, the bias could not have been any stronger at this point. That everything that became known around the Mitchells, their evidence was completely played down, it did not support her hypothesis. And this was only to continue and added to, with the likes of SK, JaF and MK. Still downplaying everything around the Mitchells, of the clear evidence they had gave which was damning, the main part of why LM could not be eliminated.
And we know without a shadow of doubt she continued along this path for so long, how could one possibly backtrack? Those days of Jigsawman and onto "No Smoke". She had spent so long building up on this hypothesis, her case from those days prior to this arrest. Of using every means available to spread those theories around. To draw away from the evidence, the evidence that they the Mitchells gave.
And it really does all apply in reverse, of everything she attempts to pin onto the police she is actually guilty of herself, is she not? It has been her tunnel vision, her confirmation bias that has brought us to the present day. Of the questions she set herself from that completely biased viewpoint, as soon as she became involved with the Mitchells. Of then attempting to work through that standard list of breaches and badly applying them to this case. And it fails, thus why we border on ridicule, with this one officer out of three noting "with the boyfriend". That scraping to find wrong in others whilst blanking the Mitchells.
Of tying in cases where there has been a clear breach, where innocent people have suffered a MOJ and laying them alongside the Mitchell case. By using those comparisons to show her audience how it works. And for those who are innocent, it is easy to understand and take on board what Ms Lean projects. That when people do not know this case, they easily come away with the proclamation of Innocence, of those breaches that are in effect all too simple are they not? - For there is blind faith in the author. They do not know the confirmation bias on which it has all been founded upon.
