Author Topic: What makes you certain that Luke Mitchell is guilty beyond reasonable doubt?  (Read 9772 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline faithlilly


No, I don't think it's possible.  Nor do I think trauma and shock would, somehow make all three witnesses invent the behaviour of a dog.  My only problem with this is, who has actually seen the statements?

The BBC certainly have as they quoted from them on the Frontline Scotland programme on the case.
« Last Edit: May 25, 2021, 11:16:43 AM by faithlilly »

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2151
  • Total likes: 790
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
The BBC certainly have as they quoted them on the Frontline Scotland programme on the case.


Thanks, Faithlilly.  I haven't seen the Frontline programme.

Offline faithlilly


Thanks, Faithlilly.  I haven't seen the Frontline programme.

It’s very interesting.

Here’s the link.

https://youtu.be/-m-zHEUOFR0

Offline Nicholas


No, I don't think it's possible.  Nor do I think trauma and shock would, somehow make all three witnesses invent the behaviour of a dog.  My only problem with this is, who has actually seen the statements?

The ‘behaviour of the dog’ was invented by Luke Mitchell

‘Shock and trauma’ most probably played a part in LM’s manipulation of the unsuspecting 3 witnesses
‘I legitimately think that the word “innocence” is enough for people - that’s their due diligence’ (Devon Tracey)

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2151
  • Total likes: 790
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
The ‘behaviour of the dog’ was invented by Luke Mitchell

‘Shock and trauma’ most probably played a part in LM’s manipulation of the unsuspecting 3 witnesses

What is your evidence for these assumptions?

Offline Nicholas

What is your evidence for these assumptions?

A verdict of guilty is a good indicator
‘I legitimately think that the word “innocence” is enough for people - that’s their due diligence’ (Devon Tracey)

Offline faithlilly

A verdict of guilty is a good indicator

Every miscarriage of justice begins with a guilty verdict.

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2151
  • Total likes: 790
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
A verdict of guilty is a good indicator

Not necessarily.

Offline Nicholas

Every miscarriage of justice begins with a guilty verdict.

Luke Mitchell’s campaign is one of innocence fraud

There hasn’t been a miscarriage of justice
‘I legitimately think that the word “innocence” is enough for people - that’s their due diligence’ (Devon Tracey)

Offline faithlilly

Luke Mitchell’s campaign is one of innocence fraud

There hasn’t been a miscarriage of justice

That’s a matter of opinion.

Offline Parky41

What is your evidence for these assumptions?

The testimony of the search trio are witness to this. Of that very manipulation. Of being led on to this path by him. Of asking for something for his dog to scent with. Of introducing the woodland at the Gino spot. Of the turmoil in thought upon minutes later being faced with Jodi being dead. - Of the shock, of trying to relate what had happened. Of coming to this V, of a dog up at a wall here and so forth - they were not using words the same at LM, of being led to Jodi, of his dog alerting to Jodi. One minute they are at this V and in seconds he is shouting out he has found something - bang. And we can see once that fog lifted a little, when that serious of events were clarified. That there was absolutely nothing that showed that it was LM's dog who led him to this V - it was him. And we know that he only clarified his lies more - of being 40ft down passed this V break. So yes, there is every evidence of manipulation - from that very moment, LM lied, when he said Jodi had failed to meet with him - in Newbattle. Of offering to search and be on the very path, next to where he had murdered her. - clear manipulation.

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2151
  • Total likes: 790
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Luke Mitchell’s campaign is one of innocence fraud

There hasn’t been a miscarriage of justice

How can you be so sure?

Offline Nicholas

How can you be so sure?

There are numerous reasons

Sandra Leans malicious tactics are a big give away
‘I legitimately think that the word “innocence” is enough for people - that’s their due diligence’ (Devon Tracey)

Offline Nicholas

⬇️     *&^^&


MR: ‘I know we are all doing our best with letters and e-mails etc to try for an independent enquiry, has anyone actually put forward complaints against the serving force that dealt with the case? ie...Cheif executive of Police Scotland?

MR: ‘Just write to your local MP, or Nicola Sturgeon stating all your concerns about the way the case was so badly handled by Lothian and Borders police (now police Scotland), the detectives, the pathologist, the jurors, the judge, Donald Findlay, state everything you can think about, how the whole search party were not taken away, just Luke, how Mia acted at the V point which alerted Luke to the V, how the other 3 members changed statements, clothes not taken, didn’t know where they were when the moped was leaning against the wall, how the moped was crushed the next day. No DNA of Luke’s, the way the officers interviewed a 14yr old boy under section 14, they way they questioned him about sexual activity, when they said Jodi wasn’t sexually assaulted, the way he was tried by media, the way he was main suspect from day one but evidence of DNA on the deceased body of 5 other people. There is actually loads you could right, it takes time to write all the wrong doings down, but just think, it might just be enough to make them think, moving the body onto a plastic sheet, no tent erected to save evidence, the scene being bleached before the sniffer dogs were taken up from England, but only the Easthouse side of the scene so that the dogs would go in the Newbattle direction. Loads to write about in your letter, that’s just a few pointers for you to start with.. NO EVIDENCE AT ALL TO CONVICT LUKE..hope this helps.X
« Last Edit: May 25, 2021, 09:14:21 PM by Nicholas »
‘I legitimately think that the word “innocence” is enough for people - that’s their due diligence’ (Devon Tracey)

Offline Mr Apples

3rd September 2003

JAMES MATTHEWS:   This burning of clothes keeps getting mentioned and there is also the subject of a missing knife, is that your missing knife?
LUKE:   No.  The burning clothes that wasn’t us.  They just stated that a female relative of the suspect admitted to burning clothes.


JAMES MATTHEWS:   Was that you or anyone connected to you?
LUKE:   No, not that we know of.

Interesting. Who was this supposed female relative of the suspect burning clothes??