Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?

[Nicholas]

And some have sense to ask - as what is being suggested, regardless of which way one may look at in, however many options of nonsense are pushed out. That it is completely ludicrous to tie this stocky man in with someone who knew this girl. But we do not have to of course. As there has been nothing in the slightest - to confirm that this was Jodi herself. It matters not, how many times Ms Lean may wish to push DF to the background in all of this - that his team of highly professional bodies looked over every inch of these possible sightings. The excuses - DF could not use any of this as they were not inclusive of the prosecution case. That there was no funding - the usual guff of course: As we know DF included part of a witness statement in respect of the duo on the bike - of a witness that was no inclusive of the trial itself as in being called to give evidence.

We know that DF had asked the boys on the bike - why was your bike up against this wall, close to the V break? - "I dunno?" You see, he did have this statement from the Basically Tool Hire place. The witness was not called of course. He did however attempt to use it, as he had it and he wanted to disperse doubt amongst the Jury. He is the defence after all. He knew this claimed sighting was both impossible and it had not been confirmed for reliability. - But he did not introduce any "possible" sightings of this girl nor that of this Stocky man - for he had seen all of the information on it. He knew these had not been confirmed, that they held no water. There was absolutely nothing to show - that Jodi had left home after 5pm. That she was being "followed" by anyone and most definitely not by her brother, or sisters boyfriend, JF or anyone else. Again we are being asked ("the willfully ignorant") To ignore everything and everyone else to concentrate on Ms Leans slim to nil possibilities of all and everything. Really?

‘The wilfully ignorant’ indeed 

[Nicholas]

‘The wilfully ignorant’ indeed 

‘The wilfully ignorant’ are posting photos of [Name removed]’s mother making vitriolic and highly offensive comments, asking why she’s not being carried out of court kicking and screaming - if it was their daughter blah blah

Whilst Sandra Lean sits back watching, rubbing her hands with a smirk on her face not bothering to point out they aren’t the photos of when JuJ attended her daughters killers murder trial

They were taken years later


Then there’s a post made by someone called Morag Richie - which reads,

‘One day many will hang their heads in shame, when they realise the evil they defended’

[Nicholas]

It takes very little common sense to realise - That there was definitely no confirmed sightings of Jodi walking to this path to meet with Luke. If there had been they would simply have been used. By both sides. First of all, when one wants to talk stitch ups - would it have mattered moving AB a couple of minutes forward - and this possible sighting of Jodi a couple of minutes back to tie together. For that is the reality here. One it was not confirmed as Jodi thus not used. If it had been confirmed as her it would simply have been used. And IF it had been a positive sighting, and there was anything at all of substance - that could have shown the sighting by AB to be wrong - It would have been used - Plain and simple. DF would have done to AO, JuJ and anyone else what he did to the duo on the bike - any means to show that Jodi had not left her house shortly after 4.50pm. There simply was nothing to use. There was absolutely nothing in these claims - That Jodi had left much later, that she was being "followed". Irrespective of the press (they hate).There had been possible sightings of a male, walking along in the direction of Morris Road, possibly at the same time as Jodi. Not following - absolute nonsense. - Makes it sound the part however - doesn't it?

This stocky man is nothing more than a smoke screen - for those willing to soak any piece of nonsense up. We know an appeal was put out when witness's first came forward - and we know once the girl with the buggy came forward all changed - perhaps Ms Lean needs to show her statement? We know one witness had gotten her day/ time and ID of the stocky man completely wrong. And DF knew why all the information, ID and timings of this stocky man were also wrong - Not Ms Lean though. One must ignore every other piece of evidence. It is irrelevant as they do not fit with Ms Leans theories - those ever so accurate fictional pieces of narrative? "those rivers of ink?"

‘Rivers of ink’ indeed

With messages to her fans ‘thanks for caring’

Foxtrot Oscar Sandra !

[Nicholas]

If anyone did send her a private message referring to her as a witch - as she publicly claimed - they possibly meant the wicked witch of the west

https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/women-autism-spectrum-disorder/202010/are-you-narcissist-s-flying-monkey


Bernadette Major
‘I know you have had all sorts of names thrown at you and it's never stopped you fighting YES FIGHTING for the truth. I'm guessing the family don't want the truth which is strange.

Sandra Lean
‘Bernadette Major Witch, in my circles, isn't an insult at all - it refers to those with a close affinity to nature!!! And, even as an insult, it's pretty mild compared to some of the others!!!!


Bernadette Major mother of Danny Major ➡️ https://www.channel4.com/news/danny-major-west-yorkshire-police-violent-assault

LAWS31062 Miscarriages of Justice Claire McGourlay 2018-2019

By Claire Mcgourlay
an academic
Andrew Green and Fintan Walker also involved in course delivery

Actual innocence: when justice goes wrong and how to make it right - Jim Dwyer, Peter Neufeld, Barry Scheck 2003
Book  Not essential reading but a good overview of the USA system
 

Innocents betrayed: a true story of justice abandoned - Sandra Lean 2018
Book Further
 
 
Informative Pre-course Reading 2 items
These are not hard books to read and should give you a sense of what the course will be about.
The secret barrister: stories of the law and how it's broken 2018
Book  Also available as an eBook via VLE books - follow the 'Online Resource' link
 
Guilty until proven innocent: the crisis in our justice system - Jon Robbins 2018
Book  Also available as an EBSCO eBook - follow the 'Online Resource' link


https://manchester.rl.talis.com/lists/778B24E0-BE72-A647-1228-AC3012287E29.html

 

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=89.msg494098#msg494098

Claire McGourlay says:
April 7, 2016 at 1:24 pm
Although this letter was not an open letter about you here is our answer to you.
Since you took an arbitrary decision two years ago to close down the network that linked innocence projects (rather than reform it into a democratic mutual support organization), you are not entitled to statistics from us (particularly when you tweet about how useless we all are-very unnecessary in my opinion and I can’t reply as you have blocked me and my students) and yes we have moved on and are doing very well indeed.
We have no fear of transparency, so here is some information.
We have 13 active clients, not including dormant cases i.e. those that we can’t work on, or which are with the CCRC.
We also did a significant amount of work on Danny Major’s case but no longer can as we’ve been prevented by the intervention of Greater Manchester Police.
How long do we work on a case? Varies, and as you well know, is out of our control: delays caused by CPS, lawyers, clients, discoveries of potential fresh evidence that have to be followed up, clients becoming uncontactable at times.
Requests/applications to the police or CPS for access to exhibits or biological samples for testing by new techniques? Irrelevant in most of our cases (only 1 of our cases involved this).
Applications to the CCRC? One refusal and 3 cases currently under consideration by CCRC. Additionally, actively compiling applications on behalf of 4 clients. Others are delayed due to new lines of inquiry opening up which are likely to produce additional significant fresh evidence, which we are pursuing on the instructions of our clients.
As you are well aware there are no simple answers to such complex questions where complex and detailed responses are required. We do not need to spend further time on this, as we have cases to work on. All our clients are informed about how we work when we offer to take on their cases, and kept informed of progress or problems when they occur. We also publish an annual report and anyone is welcome to it.
In a similar spirit of transparency, I trust that you will answer my following questions:
1.   In May 2013 (the latest time for which the Inquiry newsletter – edition 8 – posts such data), INUK claims that 110 cases had been referred to member projects, and there was a further waiting list of 113. Please let us know how those figures are broken down and what happened to those on the waiting list when you disbanded INUK.
2.   As regards INUK’s current status, there is clear confusion about what INUK now is, and the website is misleading. It is not a membership organisation; it is not a network; it does not represent the UK. Will you please urgently amend the website wording to clarify that confusion so that vulnerable people looking for help know exactly what INUK now is and what it is not?
3.   You say you are doing casework. How many cases are you working on, and what stages are they at? Who is doing this casework?
https://www.thejusticegap.com/open-letter-ccrc-2/

Professor Claire McGourlay
https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/claire.mcgourlay.html

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=89.msg494098#msg494098

[Nicholas]

And some have sense to ask - as what is being suggested, regardless of which way one may look at in, however many options of nonsense are pushed out. That it is completely ludicrous to tie this stocky man in with someone who knew this girl. But we do not have to of course. As there has been nothing in the slightest - to confirm that this was Jodi herself. It matters not, how many times Ms Lean may wish to push DF to the background in all of this - that his team of highly professional bodies looked over every inch of these possible sightings. The excuses - DF could not use any of this as they were not inclusive of the prosecution case. That there was no funding - the usual guff of course: As we know DF included part of a witness statement in respect of the duo on the bike - of a witness that was no inclusive of the trial itself as in being called to give evidence.

We know that DF had asked the boys on the bike - why was your bike up against this wall, close to the V break? - "I dunno?" You see, he did have this statement from the Basically Tool Hire place. The witness was not called of course. He did however attempt to use it, as he had it and he wanted to disperse doubt amongst the Jury. He is the defence after all. He knew this claimed sighting was both impossible and it had not been confirmed for reliability. - But he did not introduce any "possible" sightings of this girl nor that of this Stocky man - for he had seen all of the information on it. He knew these had not been confirmed, that they held no water. There was absolutely nothing to show - that Jodi had left home after 5pm. That she was being "followed" by anyone and most definitely not by her brother, or sisters boyfriend, JF or anyone else. Again we are being asked ("the willfully ignorant") To ignore everything and everyone else to concentrate on Ms Leans slim to nil possibilities of all and everything. Really?

It takes very little common sense to realise - That there was definitely no confirmed sightings of Jodi walking to this path to meet with Luke. If there had been they would simply have been used. By both sides. First of all, when one wants to talk stitch ups - would it have mattered moving AB a couple of minutes forward - and this possible sighting of Jodi a couple of minutes back to tie together. For that is the reality here. One it was not confirmed as Jodi thus not used. If it had been confirmed as her it would simply have been used. And IF it had been a positive sighting, and there was anything at all of substance - that could have shown the sighting by AB to be wrong - It would have been used - Plain and simple. DF would have done to AO, JuJ and anyone else what he did to the duo on the bike - any means to show that Jodi had not left her house shortly after 4.50pm. There simply was nothing to use. There was absolutely nothing in these claims - That Jodi had left much later, that she was being "followed". Irrespective of the press (they hate).There had been possible sightings of a male, walking along in the direction of Morris Road, possibly at the same time as Jodi. Not following - absolute nonsense. - Makes it sound the part however - doesn't it?

The attempts to re write history

Sandra Lean
‘CH There was no meeting whatsoever arranged for 5pm that evening - the texts were never recovered, but previous evidence suggests that they normally met up about 6pm. The texts arranging to meet that night were never recovered. Jodi's body was found just before 11.38pm

[Nicholas]

This stocky man is nothing more than a smoke screen - for those willing to soak any piece of nonsense up. We know an appeal was put out when witness's first came forward - and we know once the girl with the buggy came forward all changed - perhaps Ms Lean needs to show her statement? We know one witness had gotten her day/ time and ID of the stocky man completely wrong. And DF knew why all the information, ID and timings of this stocky man were also wrong - Not Ms Lean though. One must ignore every other piece of evidence. It is irrelevant as they do not fit with Ms Leans theories - those ever so accurate fictional pieces of narrative? "those rivers of ink?"

‘A theory is a rational type of abstract thinking about a phenomenon, or the results of such thinking. The process of contemplative and rational thinking is often associated with such processes as observational study or research.

Innocence fraud all the way for me - nothing whatsoever to do with her ‘theories’

[Nicholas]

What a turn out indeed - from the wannabe and has been gangsters. Shocking is it not that some did not wait around for the infamous Steele? Do they all repent to the almighty God for their very shady pasts----------that they speak of?

Killer groupies

[Nicholas]

According to the late fbi profiler Roy Hazelwood,

‘in certain rare instances, a groupie wants to experience the crimes of the killer vicariously through him’

Maybe not so rare 

[Brietta]

Killer groupies

Killers seem to have a charisma for some.  Think of the number of women who marry them behind bars ~ the most recent I know of >
Scots gran hoping to marry US death row triple murderer branded 'crazy b***h' by victim's mother  13 MAY 2020

Michele German, 46, has told of her “obsession” with John Lotter, saying she would marry him “in a heartbeat”, though “he’ll kill me for saying that”.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scots-gran-hoping-marry-death-22017020

[Nicholas]

Killers seem to have a charisma for some.  Think of the number of women who marry them behind bars ~ the most recent I know of >
Scots gran hoping to marry US death row triple murderer branded 'crazy b***h' by victim's mother  13 MAY 2020

Michele German, 46, has told of her “obsession” with John Lotter, saying she would marry him “in a heartbeat”, though “he’ll kill me for saying that”.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/scots-gran-hoping-marry-death-22017020

 

[Nicholas]

Think of the number of women who marry them behind bars

Do you think prisons should ban marriages behind bars?

[Nicholas]

What a turn out indeed - from the wannabe and has been gangsters. Shocking is it not that some did not wait around for the infamous Steele? Do they all repent to the almighty God for their very shady pasts----------that they speak of?

Killer groupies

Killers seem to have a charisma for some.

Do you think these men find killer Luke Mitchell charismatic ?

[Brietta]

Do you think prisons should ban marriages behind bars?

If people want to be idiots who am I to try to stop them?

[Nicholas]

If people want to be idiots who am I to try to stop them?

Do you mean people who marry are ‘idiots’ or only those who marry someone in prison ?

[Brietta]

Do you think these men find killer Luke Mitchell charismatic ?

He must have had something going for him to attract the following he did before and after Jodi's murder.  Whether he still has the same charisma I've no idea.