A 12 point challenge for those who think Mitchell is guilty

[Nicholas]

If anyone dares to mention the abundance of lies with the Mitchells, or the manipulation and lies from Ms Lean/Mitchell - up pops the Jones's. And bang we have, that manipulation and lie?

 

[Nicholas]

Jodi's mother had not said that her daughter had never walked this path alone, she had said that she had been banned from doing so. And again we can ask those questions, that will not be answered - What did Jodi's mother say about this path? Why had she banned her daughter? when was this ban put in place? - These are standard questions that would have been asked and answers given - what we get instead is that repetitive empty bias. That 5%.

 

[Nicholas]

Judith said Jodi never walked the Roan’s Dyke path alone, Janine, under oath, testified that her motherknew fine well that she did. When DF asked her if she was sure she simply answered ‘yes’....so not quiet as honest as you’d have us believe. As an aside did Judith never ask the three searchers why they were searching the path as Jodi wasn’t allowed to walk there alone?

Those lies to cover up more lies - that misinformation pushed to add weight to the lies?

 

Without full context the ‘yes’ answer can be manipulated to suit

Sandra Lean on JuJ

so not quiet* as honest as you’d have us believe

*Did Sandra Lean originally write ‘quiet’ or ‘quite’ ?

[faithlilly]

In reply to, that Ms Lean would not use her own name on this forum.

You are of course correct - the one forum she will not use her own name, is this one. However this is Ms Lean we are talking about. She is renowned for having to be the lead in all discussion of LM. I do not believe she readily sits aside, one will be and is chapping at the proverbial bit continuously? She has a certain way with her, a trade mark. One which is this desire to mock, especially when one is unable to prove a point, the ridicule comes in and the lies - Any means used, to score. This dreek to dreich, pulpit to parapet, poured to pored? rags to broadsheets? The latest lie is that of JuJ, Ms Leans? favourite line of attack. If anyone dares to mention the abundance of lies with the Mitchells, or the manipulation and lies from Ms Lean/Mitchell - up pops the Jones's. And bang we have, that manipulation and lie? - Jodi's mother had not said that her daughter had never walked this path alone, she had said that she had been banned from doing so. And again we can ask those questions, that will not be answered - What did Jodi's mother say about this path? Why had she banned her daughter? when was this ban put in place? - These are standard questions that would have been asked and answers given - what we get instead is that repetitive empty bias. That 5%.

If you admit that Jodi’s mum knew that Jodi walked the path alone, I’m not sure what your point is. Did Jodi delete the texts herself so her mum didn’t know that she was going down the path to Newbattle?  Now there’s a question. Further if JuJ didn’t want Jodi to walk the path did she think that the path was dangerous? If so, why? Had something happened previously?

Those lies to cover up more lies - that misinformation pushed to add weight to the lies?

And that revolving door of nothing - Of every single piece of information in those statements - of why Jodi's family were on Roansdyke path - to meet with LM. Of this period of around 30mins. From LM being on this path to LM shouting out he had found something. - Of this mother and the police filling in this missing person report at the same time. And bang - Jodi is found. Within 10mins of this meet.

What would have happened if Luke hadn’t met the other searchers? When he started out from his home he knew nothing about them. That would have been a bit of a hole in his plan right there.

And we are being asked - Did Judith never ask the searchers why they were on this path? - Really? if Jodi had been banned from using it? Let's think of those calls - of the police and the report. And of time and communication - One minute we know this mother has been told LM is on this path, looking? heading to Jodi's house. The search trio are also heading to Easthouse's - a search is to be organised. The problem with this, is - When, where, how? JuJ is busy with the police. And Bang - a body has been found. - And you want to ask this ridiculous question, of why she had not asked the searchers why they were on a path Jodi was not supposed to walk? When we know why they were on the path. We know why they headed there. - We know without a shadow of a doubt that this mother had barely time to draw breath, as did the police as did the three members of Jodi's family - All at this point franticly worried about Jodi, after being told she had not been with LM all evening. - Your conspiracy theories have no room here Faithlilly?

JuJ knew Jodi used the path, JaJ and AW confirmed it in statements and in court.

No one  one conspired to put LM on this path - he did that.
No one conspired to make LM climb the wall at the Gino spot - he did that
No one conspired to make LM go over this V upon reaching it - he did that
No one conspired to make LM, with the greatest of ease shout out he had found something - he did that
No one conspired to make up a completely false claim of his dog reacting parallel to where Jodi lay - he did that
No one made LM and co lie about all and everything - they did that. And that is everything. From that very moment he had stated he had walked some distance passed this V - around 40-60ft. From that moment he made claim to not knowing of it's existence -------------------

Why do you continue to post such demonstrably dishonest disinformation? It’s all there in the first statements of the searchers.

The list yet again is endless - And one wants to speed one party up whilst slowing the other down - in an attempt to show that there was more time for LM to have done all he claimed. But one can no slow it down and one can not slow down how ready and prepped LM was. That call at 10.51pm where he offered to search and being on this path by 10.59pm.

More lies, more misinformation - you are fooling no-one here. It is a well known fact that the Jones family moved to Easthouse's - after the death of Jodi's father. Do you simply just choose to make all and everything up as you go along? - One minute you are reciting Ms Lean to the letter T whilst in the next breath, choosing to leave out the masses of information she has already put out over these years? So we do not buy this "as far as we are aware" Or the missing calls, or the statements or just about much of anything at all - those wares that are peddled continuously? The trouble with lies, with the consistent changes in story and fallacy of reasoning - they just keep coming back to bite you.

When did the Joneses move to Easthouses? JaJ was 9 when her father died....she was 14 when she left home to live with her gran. It’s ridiculous to claim that she didn’t know the path before that night.

[Nicholas]

And that revolving door of nothing - Of every single piece of information in those statements - of why Jodi's family were on Roansdyke path - to meet with LM.

Jodi’s family went to meet 14 year old Luke because his mother Corrine had sent him out searching alone

[Nicholas]

I’ve lost count of Sandra lean’s diversions

Referring to people as ‘Trolls’ is another of her diversions

Some of the people she refers to as ‘troll’s are even labelled ‘special’

[Nicholas]

Of this period of around 30mins. From LM being on this path to LM shouting out he had found something. - Of this mother and the police filling in this missing person report at the same time.

Has Sandra Lean ever commented on whether or not the timings on the missing persons report were recorded accurately?

Or did they resemble something like the timings on the Bamber case files?

[Nicholas]

I read the article first in the newspaper and can confirm the word the journalist used was "pored".  I had intended to rectify the error made in the online version when it leapt out at me as I uploaded it, but I forgot.

I do have a copy of the news article (not the website version) where it clearly states ‘pored’ NOT ‘poured’ but I’m unable to upload anything to the forum

[Nicholas]

I do have a copy of the news article (not the website version) where it clearly states ‘pored’ NOT ‘poured’ but I’m unable to upload anything to the forum

With regards Jane Hamilton’s latest news article - where Sandra Lean makes the false claim on her Facebook page about the ‘pored’ word

Sandra Lean states in a comment in response to those of her followers who chose to pile in

‘actually, may have been a Freudian slip. As in, they poured their lies and misinterpretations over the truth for years.

 

[Nicholas]

With regards Jane Hamilton’s latest news article - where Sandra Lean makes the false claim on her Facebook page about the ‘pored’ word

Sandra Lean states in a comment in response to those of her followers who chose to pile in

‘actually, may have been a Freudian slip. As in, they poured their lies and misinterpretations over the truth for years.

 

Sandra Lean’s statement in full reads:
‘actually, may have been a Freudian slip. As in, they poured their lies and misinterpretations over the truth for years. I can’t believe a journalist with so many years experience would have made such a beginners mistake?’


The Freudian slips are all yours Sandra and it is you who is pouring your lies and misinterpretations on the truth!

And Jane Hamilton didn’t make any such ‘beginners mistake’!

[Venturi Swirl]

Whether or not the journalist actually made the typo (and let's face it we all make them from time to time) it's pretty damn pathetic to ridicule the author's entire output based on one easily made mistake, but so typical of the this type of person. 

[Nicholas]

Whether or not the journalist actually made the typo (and let's face it we all make them from time to time) it's pretty damn pathetic to ridicule the author's entire output based on one easily made mistake, but so typical of the this type of person.

Do you think it’s really about Jane Hamilton or Sandra Lean?

[Venturi Swirl]

Do you think it’s really about Jane Hamilton or Sandra Lean?

I think the typo thing is being used by Lean and her supporters as a distraction from the points made in the article.  I mean it’s not as if Lean’s own supporters aren’t prone to the more than occasional typo themselves, does that mean they can all be dismissed too?

[Parky41]

If you admit that Jodi’s mum knew that Jodi walked the path alone, I’m not sure what your point is.

[/b]

Why do you continue to post such demonstrably dishonest disinformation?

JaJ was 9 when her father died....she was 14 when she left home to live with her gran. It’s ridiculous to claim that she didn’t know the path before that night.

You lied. Plain and simply - this predicative, indicative theme running rife through this campaign. Ran on the basis of someone who has never had all of anything, other than the defence files relating to DF's case of LM V HMA. Which in itself pretty much invalidates just about everything that has ever been pushed out. - Stemming all the way back to when this list of questions was  first made up.

Demonstrably false - we know you are. Lying and plying people with all sorts of rubbish?

James Jones died in 1998 - Jodi was 14 when she died in 2003. Were they twins? that both girls were 9yrs old? Of course not. How many years between the two girls? - And yet again more misinformation - JaJ was nearly 16 was she not when she went to stay with granny? She, going by the above was barely 14 when this family moved to Easthouse's?

[Chris_Halkides]

I think the typo thing is being used by Lean and her supporters as a distraction from the points made in the article.  I mean it’s not as if Lean’s own supporters aren’t prone to the more than occasional typo themselves, does that mean they can all be dismissed too?

The contents in the article are both misleading and insulting to Mitchell's supporters.  If she were really trying to help the Jones family, she showed poor judgment in how to do it.

I also found an article by Ms. Hamilton in which she casts herself as the victim.  https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/publics-true-crime-obsessions-like-23617822

I am reading an article which she coauthored with Alasdair Clark.  They make the claim that Luke's DNA was found on her bra, a dubious assertion.