I've already said that I believe anything implied to people in shock (If that's even the word) could explain their first statements but then, I believe they remembered for themselves. No implications, no inferring, just remembering for what it really was. If their statements did change then I believe they were amended to what really happened.
LM. His visit to RDP to go over his map. Showing the police just how far past he claimed they had all went. That difficulty. For Luke Mitchell had not mentioned anything around that dog, having to wade it's way through. Shrubs, tall grass, nettles. Even trees. Where the wall is barely visible. Those several feet to cross between the path and the wall. That abundance of other smells. Every sort of excretion from the many dogs there before. Of other animals. Along the edge and into the overgrowth. For what LM had described was that clearing. That direct access to the wall. Where the ground in that narrow path, that had been trampled over time, with feet accessing the woodland via the V. - And there was no doubt in the police's mind, that the search trio had been telling the truth, from that very first account. That LM and his dog, had went directly to the V break, over that clearing. Not a foot past it.
So we had Mitchell, that alibi in place, that dog up at the wall. And those arms and legs, striving to show the police that he had been far enough past that V, to even make it sound plausible in the slightest, that the dog had miraculously picked up some scent. Through the abundance of all those other smells. To pick up what exactly? That contradiction from Lean of believing Jodi had been murdered elsewhere? That he had nothing to scent with of Jodi's, and by Leans reckoning very little in the way of blood. Which we know is nonsense. Due to rainfall, pore space of soil and so forth. That space between the path and the wall, that overgrowth and all else. The more he tried to clarify, to make it seem plausible the bigger the hole he dug. - For he had not been a foot past that V break. Straight to it. And those 20 mins on the path prior to the search trio arriving, of any other scents left by Mitchell and his dog on the way up. Of what was to transpire, that even here, Mitchell had led his dog to the wall at the V break, by his own description of the wall.
Those clear clarifications - of three people maintaining as they always stated, that Michell and his dog went to the V. Of Mitchells clarification, of striving to make his tale believable. Of his dog being almost at the same spot to where Jodi lay in the woods. Across that overgrowth, over that wall . - Caught in his own lies. Nothing in the slightest to do with the search trio. They did not make Mitchell in his clarification, lie even more.
And this prepped and ready. Waiting anxiously on that call/text from Jodi's parents. Now we know already Lean has fed people Mitchells lies. But I wanted to pick up on this claimed call to the emergency services. Of Jodi being reported missing before she was known to be missing? It is hard to work fact from fiction with Lean. Where most is based upon half truths and misinformation. But of no phone number? And of Mitchell and his PAYG sims. Of impatiently waiting since 10pm. Like the scarp yard theories, of SM, one has to seriously consider here. Did LM call the emergency services? For I firmly believe, all these notions stem from the Mitchells, of truth closer to home. Of SM and cars. Does anyone know if he worked for a scrap merchants back in 2003? For his finish time most days was to be home by 3.30. Too early for garages/mechanics but not for scrap merchants? That the only person we know to be prepped and ready, to know that Jodi would be missing, was Mitchell. That if any call had been made, then it was Mitchell who made it. That any details in this call, must have been extremely vague. For the only call that the police responded to, was the one made by Jodi's mother at 10.50pm.
So, yes rulesapply. I firmly believe these statements were clarified to Mitchell leading the dog. Not once had they agreed with Mitchell, this nonsense, inference of alerting to Jodi, of leading "them" to Jodi. These were Mitchells claims, his words. And he described, as they did. Of the dog with him, going straight across that trampled ground. Directly to the V. That if people in their blindness, are naive enough to claim they were all inferring the same as Mitchell - more fool them. By simply accepting the assumption of a person, who's bias stemmed from that collusion, between a murderer, his mother and herself. Who has been caught time and again, of manipulating evidence so far to the extreme it becomes almost intangible. Where it could not be any plainer, that she uses people, as pawns, smokescreens to divert away from the lies, the evidence the Mitchells gave.
That those claims of being able to back everything up, should be enough and are for the most part, to make the sensible amongst us know - only a fool puts faith in the unknown. That outwith legalities of not having those files (not supposed to), there has in reality, been nothing other than back up, to clearly show, those half truths, misinformation and downright lies. - And no, a further investigation should not be done on this basis, to appease anyone into seeing if Leans assumptions, her narrative hold any water. Chinese whispers and tittle tattle and any old nonsense misinformation, is not evidence - It does not, in the slightest change the evidence that convicted Luke Mitchell.
