Author Topic: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?  (Read 62118 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Nicholas

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #45 on: May 07, 2021, 01:02:45 AM »
We are seeing so many people quote sandra leans book as there source, the only source for facts on the case.

My question is she a credible source?

Reading these forums and other places online:

There is real question as to how long sandra really knew the mitchell family before  its claimed

Books with various misleading claims - "typos" on names, wrong info on dna and more. Its clear she is a  very active member on these support social media groups, why doesnt she correct any of the rubbish that is posted?

Its been claimed shes been seen on various forums misleading , lying, using various account names , attacking different familys?

She has a history of supporting failed campains. Some have went onto to admit guilt and some failed appeals etc etc. How many successful campains has she lead or been involved in?

Her partner at the time now ex was the name on the first website/forum to support luke mitchell and run the website from shetland and sandras home when he stayed there. It was closed, said to because of issues of the charitys accounts? Billy middleton from shetland ( google him, very shady )

Its also said online sandra said to mrs hall she had doubts over luke mitchells innocence in 2014? Simon hall is someone who sandra campained for and featured in one of her books. He later admitted his guilt

edit: i forgot to add this https://neilwilby.com/2020/06/22/dr-truthseeker-loses-her-moral-compass/


Not sure if ive missed anything, just some things ive picked up browsing.

‘Facts’ or Sandra Lean’s interpretation of the case papers?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
  • Total likes: 796
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #46 on: May 07, 2021, 07:52:26 AM »
May I remind posters that this thread is NOT about Simon Hall, nor is it about Sandra Lean's alleged relationship with Billy Middleton.

Please keep on topic, and refrain from goading other members. Thank you.

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #47 on: May 07, 2021, 08:22:04 AM »
May I remind posters that this thread is NOT about Simon Hall, nor is it about Sandra Lean's alleged relationship with Billy Middleton.

Please keep on topic, and refrain from goading other members. Thank you.
Is it not a thread about her judgement and if so isn’t her association with these individuals relevsnt?
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
  • Total likes: 796
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #48 on: May 07, 2021, 08:32:16 AM »
Is it not a thread about her judgement and if so isn’t her association with these individuals relevsnt?

It is about whether she is a credible source of information on the case of Luke Mitchell. 

All that needs to be said re Simon Hall is that he confessed to the crime of which SL thought him innocent,  and all that needs to be said about Billy Middleton, is that he worked with SL  on the WAP website.  We do not need to discuss the personal lives of others and their choices of partners------IMO.

Offline Nicholas

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #49 on: May 07, 2021, 09:20:14 AM »
It is about whether she is a credible source of information on the case of Luke Mitchell. 

All that needs to be said re Simon Hall is that he confessed to the crime of which SL thought him innocent,  and all that needs to be said about Billy Middleton, is that he worked with SL  on the WAP website.  We do not need to discuss the personal lives of others and their choices of partners------IMO.

No, in 2014 Sandra Lean gave the impression she had accepted the guilt of both killers Simon Hall and Luke Mitchell
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #50 on: May 07, 2021, 09:27:49 AM »
It is about whether she is a credible source of information on the case of Luke Mitchell. 

All that needs to be said re Simon Hall is that he confessed to the crime of which SL thought him innocent

A couple of years after Sandra Lean had given the impression she had accepted Simon Hall and Luke Mitchell’s guilt - she did an about turn http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=10768.msg557625#msg557625
« Last Edit: May 07, 2021, 09:30:06 AM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Venturi Swirl

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #51 on: May 07, 2021, 09:33:29 AM »
It is about whether she is a credible source of information on the case of Luke Mitchell. 

All that needs to be said re Simon Hall is that he confessed to the crime of which SL thought him innocent,  and all that needs to be said about Billy Middleton, is that he worked with SL  on the WAP website.  We do not need to discuss the personal lives of others and their choices of partners------IMO.
When I watched the documentary I knew nothing about Sandra Lean or her previous associations or crusades.  Now that I know more about her and her past I feel a little bit like I was groomed into supporting Mitchell.  I even signed her petition.  I would now like to take back my signature, partly because I don't trust her judgement, nor that any information she passes on about the case hasn't been twisted to suit her agenda.  That doesn't mean I'm wholly convinced that Mitchell is guilty either btw.
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2169
  • Total likes: 796
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #52 on: May 07, 2021, 10:25:36 AM »
When I watched the documentary I knew nothing about Sandra Lean or her previous associations or crusades.  Now that I know more about her and her past I feel a little bit like I was groomed into supporting Mitchell.  I even signed her petition.  I would now like to take back my signature, partly because I don't trust her judgement, nor that any information she passes on about the case hasn't been twisted to suit her agenda.  That doesn't mean I'm wholly convinced that Mitchell is guilty either btw.

I think, all we can do is read up on the case from as many sources as we can find, by as many authors as we can find (and there aren't many), and make up our own minds !

IMO, the petition won't do any harm ( if it succeeds,) and the case is looked at again.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #53 on: May 07, 2021, 10:50:45 AM »
no you can't

the whole point of bringing up this charity when talking about sandra's credibility is that they never did file any accounts. the money that people contributed to the cause presumably in good faith was unaccounted for.

https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/search-the-register/charity-details?number=sc041953

I understand your concern and I’ve posted a link below where you can report your concerns.

https://www.oscr.org.uk/about-charities/raise-a-concern/

I think if doubts are being raised about where the monies donated went to a thorough investigation would be in everyone’s interest, not least Dr Lean’s.
Brietta posted on 10/04/2022 “But whether or not that is the reason behind the delay I am certain that Brueckner's trial is going to take place.”

Let’s count the months, shall we?

Offline Nicholas

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #54 on: May 07, 2021, 03:12:56 PM »
How does that work then if the pair of them failed to notify the charity of the finances?

Billy Middleton did a sponsored run on a treadmill apparently for convicted killer Darren Martin - what happened to the money he raised for that - where are the receipts?

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=428.msg8843#msg8843
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Parky41

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #55 on: May 07, 2021, 05:55:26 PM »
Apologies - wrong thread.
« Last Edit: May 07, 2021, 07:50:05 PM by Parky41 »

Offline Nicholas

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #56 on: May 07, 2021, 09:17:03 PM »
When I watched the documentary I knew nothing about Sandra Lean or her previous associations or crusades.  Now that I know more about her and her past I feel a little bit like I was groomed into supporting Mitchell.  I even signed her petition.  I would now like to take back my signature, partly because I don't trust her judgement, nor that any information she passes on about the case hasn't been twisted to suit her agenda.  That doesn't mean I'm wholly convinced that Mitchell is guilty either btw.

So you didn’t know about her podcasts on killer & sexual deviant Matthew Hamlen https://www.hampshirechronicle.co.uk/news/14265690.matthew-hamlen-said-he-could-not-be-sure-if-he-had-sex-with-georgina-edmonds/
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #57 on: May 09, 2021, 12:24:47 AM »
Angeline aka Sandra Lean on 14 year old murder victim Jodi Jones

Dalkeith, whilst it has its problems like anywhere else, has fairly standard values and standards of personal hygiene. Its pretty safe to say it wouldn't generally be "the norm" for teenage girls to change into semen stained clothing (especially clothing belonging to someone else) to go out and meet their friends.

 *&^^&
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #58 on: May 09, 2021, 01:29:06 AM »
From Fact and Myth by jigsawman aka Sandra Lean

Monday June 30th 2003, The Police Version.

(1) Luke set off to meet Jodi at the Easthouses end of the path immediately after receiving the last text at 4.38pm. For him to have been the person sighted by Andrina Bryson at 4.48, it follows that he made the journey in 10 minutes.
By the polices own timings, it takes 5 minutes, walking at a brisk pace, to get from the end of Lukes street to the entrance to the path, and a further 10 minutes (minimum) walking at the same pace, to get from one end of the path to the other.
Therefore, Luke must have been at the entrance to the path when the exchange of texts took place.
But, according to Judy, Jodi had been grounded right up to the point where the texts were exchanged, so Luke could not have known until that point that Jodi would be coming out at all, far less that she would be on the path. He would have had no reason whatsoever to be at the entrance to the path at 4.38. Even if he had left his house on receipt of the first text at 4.34, he would still not have been able to get to the end of the path for 4.38 there are only 4 minutes between the texts, and hed need five minutes from the end of his street to the path, plus 2 3 minutes from his house to the end of the street.
There are no witnesses, anywhere, who saw Luke walking towards the end of his street, or on the Newbattle Road going towards the path at that time.
(2) Luke met Jodi at the Easthouses end of the path, and they began walking back down towards Newbattle. En route, they decided to go behind the wall for some privacy. An argument developed, because Jodi had found out about Lukes other girlfriend.
If it was Luke and Jodi that Andrina Bryson saw, we know from all of the timings that this had to have been nearer to 4.54pm than 4.38pm. (Remember the Rod Stewart track? The 4 minutes left for Jodi to get ready and leave have to include the time it took her to walk to the path itself.) So, Luke and Jodi are having a discussion at the Easthouses entrance to the path at 4.54pm. Bryson does not see them walk towards the path she is quite clear that they are standing still. Assuming, however, that they begin to walk towards the path immediately after Bryson spots them, by 5pm, they are on their way down the path. Its reasonable to assume they were not walking at a brisk pace it was a summer evening, they had no particular plans, and they were both teenagers! For some reason, however, Luke phones the speaking clock while he and Jodi are walking down the path. By 5 past five, they would probably have reached the V where the police have it that they climbed over the wall for privacy. Quite bizarrely, there has never been any mention of forensic traces on the wall itself that show Jodi climbing over the wall no fibres, hair, etc. Allowing a couple of minutes to get over the wall (its not a step through break it does have to be climbed), we have to conclude that the argument erupted immediately they got over the wall.
If the argument about the other girlfriend had begun on the path, what possible reason would they have for going over the wall?
(3) An argument erupted, and, the police claim, Luke hit Jodi in the face. At that point, they claim, she turned to head for home, when he hit her on the head with a limb from a tree. Then he strangled her until she fell to the ground almost unconscious. And then he cut her throat 12 20 times.
But the pathologist says she put up a hell of a fight, right to the end. Unconscious, or semi unconscious people arent in a position to put up a fight of any description. According to the police version, after that first hit to the face, she turned to walk away no mention of fighting back. As she turns away, she is stunned by a blow to the head, and then strangled, No fighting back.
The forensics point to a terrible struggle, with Jodis hair being pulled out by the roots, and her being dragged across the ground. She had extensive defensive injuries.
If we accept that this argument must have started at about 7 minutes past five at the earliest, according to the police, Jodi is dead 8 minutes later. At the same time, [Name removed] and [Name removed] are making their way up the path from the Newbattle end, and their bike is propped against the wall almost directly at the spot where this attack is happening. It would take a very, very cool personality to carry on attacking someone, knowing that other people were literally on the spot. Remember that the bike was noisy - if Jodi was being attacked and killed in the few minutes before 5.15, her attacker would have heard that bike approaching, and stopping within a few feet.
(4) Between 5.15pm and 5.45, the following series of events form the official police line. Jodis body is dragged across the ground to where she was eventually found. She is stripped, her hands tied behind her back with her own trousers. Her body is mutilated, some of the injuries being inflicted with careful precision. At 5.32, just 17 minutes after Jodi was killed, Luke phones Judys house in an attempt to cover his tracks. 8 minutes later, at 5.40pm, he calls again, and is completely normal on the phone. 5 minutes after that, he is on the wall at the end of his street, again, completely normal. Somewhere in this half hour, he has managed to get home, get stripped out of his clothing and clean away all forensic traces from himself and his house, get changed and back out to the end of the street. His hair was not wet at 5.45pm, so we also have to assume that he blow dried his hair in this timeframe as well. In between all of this, he makes two phone calls to Judys house to cover his tracks. His mother is instructed to dispose of the clothing.
(5) Two of the neighbours report smoke coming from the Mitchell garden at around 10pm. One claims to have smelled smoke earlier, at around 7.30, and then again later, at around 10-10.30pm. This, the police claim, was Corinne burning the clothes, although two of the witnesses refer specifically to the smell of wood smoke. With lightning speed, this woman has helped her son clean himself of all forensic traces, but then she waits some 4 hours or more before attempting to get rid of the clothing? She had a car and a dog which she regularly walked in the countryside. Why not take the clothes somewhere miles away and dispose of them? The area where Jodis body was found was well used that evening alone, we can place 7 people there with absolute certainty, and at least one other with a high degree of probability, so the body could have been discovered at any time.
(6) Luke then decides to go out with the search party, in order to appear normal, but then leads the family directly to the body. Given that we are to believe that Corinne aided and abetted Luke to dispose of all of the evidence, is it really feasible that she would then happily send him off to the very scene shed worked so hard to distance him from?
As it happened, she received the call to make her way to the police station less than two hours after this fire was first noted by the neighbours.
(7) After Luke called the police to say theyd found something, they called him back for directions, as they couldnt find the path. When they did arrive, they asked Luke to go back over the wall to show them where the body was. Luke was just 14 years old every other member of the search party was an adult, yet at no point did the police turn to any of the adults in the party their communications were solely with Luke.
(8) The police treated the family members of the search party differently because no one was actually in charge of the operation, and the individual officers just did what they thought was best. They were not treating Luke as a suspect when they stripped him, and had him medically examined and took samples, without an adult present. They had no real explanation for why they did this, or for why they didnt do it with the other members of the search party.

Notes: the police records from that night note that Luke's hair was "unwashed" and his fingernails were "grubby." Neither yielded any forensics linking Luke to the murder.

If you live in the Midlothian area, take yourself outside this evening between 5.15pm and 5.45pm - it is broad daylight, yet the police claim that Luke managed to escape the scene, get home, and get cleaned up, all without being seen. The Frontline Scotland documentary showed the "youth" hanging around at the Newbattle Road in darkness - it was 6pm, and still broad daylight. The prosecution claimed that he knew where to find the body "in the dark." It was still light, although the light was beginning to fade, when Luke left home at 10 to 11 to look for Jodi.

Finally, while Luke was still talking to the police up to 7am on the morning of July 1st, the condom leaking fresh semen had been found at the scene. Is that, perhaps, the reason Luke was treated the way he was? Did they jump to the conclusion that the condom was his? Bad mistake. 
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?
« Reply #59 on: May 09, 2021, 01:30:08 AM »
From Fact and Myth by jigsawman aka Sandra Lean

There are some notes and questions at the end of this timeline, below.

Timeline Monday June 30th 2003.

4.05pm Jodi returns home from school
4.34 4.38pm Series of texts between Lukes phone and Judys phone (Jodis phone was broken, so Jodi borrowed her mothers)
4.39pm (approx) Judy plays a Rod Stewart track which lasts more than 5 minutes to Jodi and Joseph, leaving just 4 minutes for Jodi to get ready and leave in order for Bryson to have spotted her at 4.48
4.48-4.54pm Andrina Bryson sees a girl and a youth on the entrance to the path
4.50-4.55pm [Name removed] leaves on the motorbike to meet [Name removed] at 5pm. It is believed (although not confirmed) that he picked up the bike from [Name removed]s garden and drove along Lady path which runs at right angles to Roans Dyke, before cutting through the woods to meet [Name removed].
4.55pm Luke phones his mothers work and speaks to his grandmother
4.58pm 5.10 (approx) Shane is on the internet, so the home landline is engaged.
5.00pm Two youths on the moped are chased from the tool hire premises at Newbattle, and head towards the Newbattle entrance to the path
5.03pm Luke phones the speaking clock from his mobile
5.03 5.05pm Mystery man is spotted by 2 witnesses following Jodi on the street, on her way to the path. (Spot the obvious mistake according to the Bryson sighting, she was already on the path some 9 minutes earlier) Bryson did not see the mystery man
5.03-5.15pm Somewhere in this time window, the young mum was seen walking up the same street. She saw nothing.
5.03 5.15pm A cyclist travelling up the path from the Newbattle end hears a strangling sound behind the wall. He does not see the boys on the moped, or the mystery man, or Jodi
5.05pm The youths are seen re-starting the bike, which has cut out, at the entrance to the path
5.07pm Corinne captured on CCTV in the local shop on her way home from work
5.15pm Corinne arrives home from work.
5.15pm Jodi is believed to have been murdered at this time
5.15pm The moped is propped against the wall at the V, but the riders are nowhere to be seen
5.30pm Luke leaves the house and walks to the end of the street
5.32pm Luke calls Jodis house, but the line is engaged
5.40pm Luke calls the house again this time Alan Ovens answers. He says he
told Luke Jodi had left to meet him. Luke doesnt remember exactly what was said.
5.40pm Judy and Alan leave the house to go to the cemetery immediately
following the phone call from Luke (therefore Joseph now has no alibi)
5.45 5.50 Three schoolboys see Luke sitting on a wall at the end of his street (they passed him twice, as one of them got a puncture in his bike tyre, and they had to double back.)
5.50 6.05 6 witnesses say they saw a youth hanging around on the Newbattle Road, between the end of Lukes street, and the entrance to the path (although none of them claims to have seen him at the entrance itself.) Luke says he wandered up the street a little way to Barondale Cottages, which is approximately halfway between the end of his street and the entrance to the path, to see if he could see Jodi coming. He told the police this before these witnesses came forward.
6.50-6.55pm Luke phones some male friends to see what they are doing, as Jodi still hasnt shown
7pm Luke phones his mother to tell her if Jodi comes to the house, he is in The Abbey, and to tell Jodi to come there.
9pm After hanging around the abbey for a couple of hours, the boys head for home. Luke goes up to his room and puts on a video of Red dwarf.
10.30pm Luke takes the dog for her last walk of the evening.
10.39pm Judy sends a text to Lukes phone, Right Toad, say goodnight toLuke. Thats you grounded for another week.
10.40pm Luke phones Judy to say he hasnt seen Jodi all night. Judy says she will call round Jodis friends. Luke returns to the house and tells his mother what Judy has said.
10.49pm Judy calls back to say Jodi is nowhere to be found, and she is calling the police. Luke says he will go up the path to look for Jodi, and if he doesnt find her, he will make his way to Judys house to decide what to do next. (This story was later changed to claim that Luke had agreed to meet the other members of the search party at the path.)
10.51pm Luke leaves the house with a torch and the dog. It is still light, but beginning to get dark the sky is blue rather than black)
11.03 11.05pm Luke sees people at the Easthouses end of the path. They do not come towards him, but wait for him to approach. It is the family search party.
11.06pm A call is answered on the landline in Alice Walkers house. The family search party claim they left after this call was taken. If the plan had been for Luke to leave immediately (at 10.49pm) to meet the other members of the search party, why did Judy wait until 6 minutes past 11, a full 15 minutes, before calling them to tell them of this arrangement?
And how did they manage to be at the top of the path before this time?
11.10 11.25pm The search party go back down the path, and find the body.
00.00 Luke is taken to Dalkeith Police station, stripped, medically examined, and samples taken for forensic analysis, then a statement is taken, the whole process lasting until 7am.
00.00-00.15 Forensics officer arrives at the scene, but cannot climb over the wall, so leaves. The body is uncovered.
03.00am Craig Dobbie becomes SIO
4.00am-4.30am The family search party is in Judys house, the police begin to take their statements (more than 4 hours after Luke is taken in, and after they have had the opportunity to speak to other members of the family. Their clothes are not taken for forensic examination, neither are they examined, or have samples taken.)
05.00-05.30 Police photographer/videographer records the scene. Overhanging branches have been cut down to make it easier for him to take pictures. During this time, Dobbie has spoken to the pathologist it appears he took the pathologist to the scene, although this is not absolutely clear from the records, and he was never asked directly. The body is still uncovered.
00.00-08.00am Sometime during this 8 hour period, the body was moved, rolled onto a plastic sheet, and items around it gathered up. There is no record of when this was done, or by whom. The body was left uncovered in the rain for the whole of this period.

A condom, leaking fresh semen, was found yards from the body in the early hours of July 1st. It is known, with absolute certainty, that the person who filled this condom did so behind the wall, close to where Jodi's body was found, on the evening of June 30th, and that when he was finally traced, some three years later, the statement he gave to police was demonstrably untrue. He was never investigated for this murder.

Craig Dobbie claims he became Senior Investigating Officer in charge of the case at around 3am. Why, then, did he allow the body to remain uncovered for another 5 hours? And why, 60 to 90 minutes after he became "in charge" did he not ensure the family search party were treated the same way Luke had been some 4 hours earlier?

The discrepancy between the "sightings" has never been explained. If Andrina Bryson "saw" Jodi on the entrance to the path at 4.48-4.54, how could the other witnesses have seen the mystery man following her on the street going towards the path some 9 minutes later? Remember, there were two independent witnesses to the "mystery man" yet these were dismissed in favour of the one "sighting" by Bryson, even though this meant altering the times.
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation