Ah Bullseye - I mentioned Lean, ref yourself at the same time to do with saying previously, a review would settle it once and for all if Lean was correct? If this was not you, then you simply had to say it was not.
Just a little confused around your stance. You come across as someone on the fence, then not, then back on it again. That is how I see it, no twisting required, merely an opinion. No offence intended.
Where the cousin/friend is concerned along with the cyclist who heard noises - I picked up on this as you said you had been reading up on the case for 10yrs? - I simply thought you were more clued up, accurate? There is quite a difference, If it had merely been a boy and not a fully grown man one's perceptions can be different. Where YW is concerned, she has been discussed a lot in this case - especially where the gloves/condom and of Jodi being there on another occasion with Luke, out late. Of her being Jodi's cousin. So again it just surprises me, that after paying so much attention to this case, to the point of requesting a review, that you do not know these things?
Perhaps doing a little bit more research and study may clarify things more - you may not have the need for a review?
Where the media is concerned - If you are putting it down to age, then all good? That explains it perfectly.
I can neve quite understand this, "I believed everything I read in the papers, and found him guilty" - To then say "I always thought there was hard evidence?" - Therefore people were not really reading the papers in totality, for they made it clear the case was of a circumstantial nature.
