Is DR Sandra Lean a credible source?

[Nicholas]

Were the media saying this or were they repeating what the lawyers were suggesting?


‘JODI JONES’ killer, Luke Mitchell, is set to have his conviction quashed by the Supreme Court in England, three eminent legal experts have told the Scottish Sunday Express.
In a move that will signal an astonishing escalation in the row over the independence of Scots Law, the senior solicitors insist judges in London will have no choice but to recommend freeing him on the grounds his human rights were breached. 
Mitchell, now 22, was sentenced to life in 2005 for murdering his girlfriend, Jodi, 14, in Dalkeith, Midlothian, two years before.
But he is claiming his trial was unfair because he had no access to a lawyer during interview, which has since been declared a breach of EU human rights under the controversial Cadder ruling.
In April, the Appeal Court in Edinburgh ruled that his conviction should stand as his case pre-dated the law change brought about by teenager Peter Cadder.
His lawyers had successfully argued that his human rights had been breached by an assault conviction based on evidence gained before he spoke to his solicitor
However Mitchell’s legal team is now going directly to the UK Supreme Court – the new institution which First Minister Alex Salmond has accused of undermining Scots Law – to plead “exceptional circumstances”.
Senior lawyers on both sides of the Border say this will result in his conviction being quashed. Nicholas Scullion, who has successfully represented clients using the Cadder ruling, is certain the First Minister knows the likely decision, which could come within weeks.
He said: “I do not think the public of Scotland will be behind any court that releases Luke Mitchell, but the reality is the Supreme Court probably will call this in and if so they have to release him.
“There are three bullet points of Cadder and Luke Mitchell fits every one. If they don’t quash the conviction it really calls into question the legitimacy of the Supreme Court.
“The only reason for not doing it would be because they are afraid of Alex Salmond, and that would be a breach of European convention.”
Mr Scullion, managing partner of Scotland’s criminal law firm of the year Nicholas Scullion and Co, added: “Alex Salmond knows this and he knows it’s not going to be popular, so it could not have gone better for him. English judges freeing a Scottish child murderer? Imagine if the James Bulger killers had gone to Brussels and been released.
“They haven’t reversed any convictions in England, so I think the court is being tested on Scotland, almost like the Poll Tax.
“The court is not going to pick a fight with David Cameron, so it is testing the waters in Scotland.”
English barrister Jodie Blackstock, who acted as counsel for Peter Cadder in his landmark ruling last October, said Mitchell’s case is very similar and revealed that Mitchell’s conviction could be quashed before the summer recess.
“They need to request a special leave hearing,” she said. “It depends whether they can get that in before the summer recess. If not, then it will be heard after the recess in October.”
Jodi was 14 when her mutilated body was found near her home in Dalkeith, Midlothian, hours after she had gone to meet Mitchell.
Police spent months building a case against Mitchell, who carried knives, smoked cannabis and confessed to being a Satanist. In January 2005, he was convicted following a 42-day trial and ordered to serve at least 20 years.
He wants that decision overturned on human rights grounds, arguing he was questioned by police without a lawyer.
But two weeks ago, at the Court of Criminal Appeal, Lord Justice General Lord Hamilton and two other judges dismissed his claim, leaving the Supreme Court the next option.
Advocate Niall McCluskey yesterday stressed the Cadder ruling only applied to ‘live’ cases – and Mitchell’s was closed when his appeal failed back in 2008.
However he said: “In Mitchell’s case there is an argument about whether it is entirely concluded because there is an
outstanding sentencing appeal to be resolved.
“The question is do the Supreme Court judges think there are exceptional circumstances to look at his case?”
He added: “I can’t really comment on Luke Mitchell’s chances but in a case where there are categoric 
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/253701/Luke-Mitchell-set-to-have-his-conviction-quashed-by-Supreme-Court-in-England

Jodie Blackstock  ➡️ ‘Rebuilding from the Rubble: Compensation for victims of Miscarriages of Justice’ https://t.co/JsZieYhQUw?amp=1

[Nicholas]

What would be hilarious - if it didn’t all stem from the brutal murder of 14 year old Jodi Jones🌻 

is the fact Sandra Lean has mentioned the ‘Cadder ruling’ in her latest podcast and referred to ‘the media’

Would that be the very same media who she and the Mitchell’s falsely claim ‘tried’ Luke Mitchell 🙄

“...the media were openly saying, they were speaking to lawyers and solicitors (what’s the difference between the two?) and they were all openly saying, in this case it’s a classic ‘Cadder case’ they would have to overturn Luke’s conviction, they would have to, but we had to first apply to the Scottish courts for permission to include a ‘Cadder’ point or a ‘Cadder ‘ appeal and then if they rejected it we could go direct to the Supreme Court now this is nonsense - we could go direct to the Supreme Court but only after we’d been to the Scottish court and been turned down. So we went to the Scottish court and basically because of that they knew we were going to be relying on the sentence court the sentence appeal as being still live proceedings. They turned us down and we got the application ready to go to the Supreme Court and two days before we were ready to lodge it they made a decision in the sentence appeal and the Supreme Court wouldn’t accept it because there were no longer love proceedings in the case. That I I thought id seen every dirty trick in the book up to that point that one it just it was so transparent it was so transparent these level experts were saying in Luke’s case the ‘Cadder’ point would would definitely mean the conviction had to be overturned and they got us two days two days before in the technicality that there were no longer live proceedings in the case so yeah there is an example of how of how they can manipulate their own rules to suit themselves”    (sic)

When does Sandra Lean say Luke Mitchell confessed?

‘Seven supreme court justices will sit to consider the issue. Their decision will have significant ramifications for thousands of prosecutions pending in Scotland, and indeed many thousands of convictions already secured where confession evidence of this type was used at trial.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/may/23/scottish-law-supreme-court-confession

[Brietta]

What would be hilarious - if it didn’t all stem from the brutal murder of 14 year old Jodi Jones🌻 

is the fact Sandra Lean has mentioned the ‘Cadder ruling’ in her latest podcast and referred to ‘the media’

Would that be the very same media who she and the Mitchell’s falsely claim ‘tried’ Luke Mitchell 🙄

“...the media were openly saying, they were speaking to lawyers and solicitors (what’s the difference between the two?) and they were all openly saying, in this case it’s a classic ‘Cadder case’ they would have to overturn Luke’s conviction, they would have to, but we had to first apply to the Scottish courts for permission to include a ‘Cadder’ point or a ‘Cadder ‘ appeal and then if they rejected it we could go direct to the Supreme Court now this is nonsense - we could go direct to the Supreme Court but only after we’d been to the Scottish court and been turned down. So we went to the Scottish court and basically because of that they knew we were going to be relying on the sentence court the sentence appeal as being still live proceedings. They turned us down and we got the application ready to go to the Supreme Court and two days before we were ready to lodge it they made a decision in the sentence appeal and the Supreme Court wouldn’t accept it because there were no longer love proceedings in the case. That I I thought id seen every dirty trick in the book up to that point that one it just it was so transparent it was so transparent these level experts were saying in Luke’s case the ‘Cadder’ point would would definitely mean the conviction had to be overturned and they got us two days two days before in the technicality that there were no longer live proceedings in the case so yeah there is an example of how of how they can manipulate their own rules to suit themselves”    (sic)

It is nothing more or less than obsessive baying at the moon ...

Evil killer Luke Mitchell loses fifth appeal against Jodi Jones murder conviction


ByGordon Mcilwraith
00:00, 16 APR 2011 updated 2013

MONSTER Luke Mitchell lost a FIFTH appeal bid yesterday over his horrific murder of girlfriend Jodi Jones.

Even before the killer's latest defeat, his attempts to escape justice had cost taxpayers at least £112,000.

Yesterday's hearing will cost thousands more in Legal Aid to Mitchell.

And his lawyers are considering a sixth appeal attempt, this time at the Supreme Court in London.

Campaigners say Mitchell is tormenting Jodi's family by continuing to drag them into court. The charity Mothers Against Murder and Aggression said: "If you're convicted, you should not be able to appeal unless new evidence comes to light."

Mitchell, now 22, was 14 when he killed Jodi in 2003 in woods near their home town of Dalkeith, Midlothian.

He smothered her, forced her to her knees and cut her throat from behind, almost severing her head. He then stripped Jodi naked and mutilated her body.

Mitchell was convicted of murder in 2005 and given a 20-year minimum sentence.

His lawyers made their first appeal against his convict ion in 2005. They lost, and the taxpayer was left with a bill for £78,609.

Mitchell then lost an appeal against the length of his sentence. The cost to the public was £10,312.

He appealed again against his conviction in 2008, claiming that his 2005 appeal wasn't fair. It cost £22,838 and he lost again.

Mitchell also made a second appeal against his 20-year tariff, in February this year, but the court took less than a minute to throw it out. The costs of that case haven't been revealed.

In his fifth appeal attempt, Mitchell tried to use the UK Supreme Court's "Cadder Ruling", which took away Scots cops' right to quiz suspects without a lawyer.

Mitchell said he should be allowed to appeal under Cadder because he was not allowed a lawyer during a six-hour "interrogation".

But Scotland's senior judge, Lord Hamilton, said the Cadder Ruling applied to "live" appeals, and Mitchell had lost his in 2008.

Mitchell, his hair in long, straggly braids, showed no emotion in the dock.

His mum Corinne sat on one side of the public gallery, with Jodi's mother Judith and other relatives on the other.

https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/evil-killer-luke-mitchell-loses-1100517

[Nicholas]

Evil killer Luke Mitchell loses fifth appeal against Jodi Jones murder conviction


ByGordon Mcilwraith
00:00, 16 APR 2011 updated 2013

Mitchell, now 22, was 14 when he killed Jodi in 2003 in woods near their home town of Dalkeith, Midlothian.

He smothered her, forced her to her knees and cut her throat from behind, almost severing her head. He then stripped Jodi naked and mutilated her body.

 

[faithlilly]

“The SCCRC looked at everything - they as with the Crown and the defence - had access to all that went into the investigation. They built up their case from each stance around this.- And of the 'Cadder ruling' - that, had LM's appeal been heard just days earlier - then his conviction would have been overturned - Ah, if only it were that simple. So, with this it is - to hang with all the evidence that convicted him - she is claiming that by the skin of his teeth - he could have been released on some technical area of law? “

Seems Dr Lean was perfectly correct.


From Nicholas.

‘JODI JONES’ killer, Luke Mitchell, is set to have his conviction quashed by the Supreme Court in England, three eminent legal experts have told the Scottish Sunday Express.
In a move that will signal an astonishing escalation in the row over the independence of Scots Law, the senior solicitors insist judges in London will have no choice but to recommend freeing him on the grounds his human rights were breached. 
Mitchell, now 22, was sentenced to life in 2005 for murdering his girlfriend, Jodi, 14, in Dalkeith, Midlothian, two years before.
But he is claiming his trial was unfair because he had no access to a lawyer during interview, which has since been declared a breach of EU human rights under the controversial Cadder ruling.’

[Parky41]

“The SCCRC looked at everything - they as with the Crown and the defence - had access to all that went into the investigation. They built up their case from each stance around this.- And of the 'Cadder ruling' - that, had LM's appeal been heard just days earlier - then his conviction would have been overturned - Ah, if only it were that simple. So, with this it is - to hang with all the evidence that convicted him - she is claiming that by the skin of his teeth - he could have been released on some technical area of law? “

Seems Dr Lean was perfectly correct.


From Nicholas.


‘JODI JONES’ killer, Luke Mitchell, is set to have his conviction quashed by the Supreme Court in England, three eminent legal experts have told the Scottish Sunday Express.
In a move that will signal an astonishing escalation in the row over the independence of Scots Law, the senior solicitors insist judges in London will have no choice but to recommend freeing him on the grounds his human rights were breached. 
Mitchell, now 22, was sentenced to life in 2005 for murdering his girlfriend, Jodi, 14, in Dalkeith, Midlothian, two years before.
But he is claiming his trial was unfair because he had no access to a lawyer during interview, which has since been declared a breach of EU human rights under the controversial Cadder ruling.’

He sacked his lawyers - and he failed to get any others on board - and it his hardly surprising is it not? - That we had the three amigos trying to tell all of those professionals how to do their Job? - and it would not have meant he was simply released. There would have had, to have been a hell of a lot shown which proved beyond reasonable doubt that breach. He did have a responsible adult with him, a social worker. And he was not intimidated in the slightest in the interview, any of them. - It would have started a process, not a simple release from or instant over turning of his conviction. If it were that simple - the jail gates would be open and thousands of people walking free. They are handled by merit, are they not? Cadder was pressured into admitting things without legal guidance. - And at the time of LM's interviews - It was many years before this ruling in 2010. So many variables. And regardless of police tactics - LM still took control. There has never been any denial of the behaviour on behalf of the police - well thought through when allowed to be used at trial. to show clearly that it did no phase LM, that he was pressured into nothing - And the ruling is used by many guilty people, as a means of trying to escape on a technicality. -  There are people who due to this breach, were pressured into given evidence that solely brought about their conviction. - Not in LM's case it did not?

[Brietta]

Luke Mitchell's Supreme Court appeal refused
Published23 November 2011

Killer Luke Mitchell will not be allowed to take his appeal against his conviction for murdering his 14-year old girlfriend Jodi Jones to the UK's highest court.

Three UK Supreme Court Justices refused permission for Mitchell, 23, to take his appeal to the London court.

Supreme Court justices said Mitchell's appeal against conviction was "closed".

He has always protested his innocence but his original appeal against conviction was rejected in 2008.

Mitchell had hoped a fresh appeal would be heard by the Supreme Court in light of a high-profile human rights decision it gave last year.

The Cadder ruling put an end to police being able to question suspects without the option of legal representation.

Earlier this year, judges in Scotland refused to grant him leave to take his case further but Mitchell applied directly to the UK Supreme Court.

It is understood that Mitchell's Supreme Court bid was refused because his initial appeal against conviction had been dealt with before the Cadder ruling was issued and it could not therefore be reopened.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-15863085

Why on earth are Mitchell's supporters still going on about Cadder when it is perfectly obvious that it is a non-starter legally because it has all been dealt with already.

So English judges are in legal agreement with Scottish judges and I believe that an attempt to take it to Europe also hit a brick wall as well.

What sort of ego trip is Sandra Lean indulging herself with here.  She is causing nothing but mischief as far as I can see.  I don't think she is helping Mitchell one iota in fact as far as getting some sort of future parole once his twenty years is up I think she has been the kiss of death.  Which is as I think it should be - but isn't she actually supposed to be. on his side.

What her obsessive antics must be doing to Jodi's family and material witnesses who probably need to put all the trauma behind them and get on with their lives can only be imagined.

[Nicholas]

Luke Mitchell's Supreme Court appeal refused
Published23 November 2011

Killer Luke Mitchell will not be allowed to take his appeal against his conviction for murdering his 14-year old girlfriend Jodi Jones to the UK's highest court.

Three UK Supreme Court Justices refused permission for Mitchell, 23, to take his appeal to the London court.

Supreme Court justices said Mitchell's appeal against conviction was "closed".

He has always protested his innocence but his original appeal against conviction was rejected in 2008.

Mitchell had hoped a fresh appeal would be heard by the Supreme Court in light of a high-profile human rights decision it gave last year.

The Cadder ruling put an end to police being able to question suspects without the option of legal representation.

Earlier this year, judges in Scotland refused to grant him leave to take his case further but Mitchell applied directly to the UK Supreme Court.

It is understood that Mitchell's Supreme Court bid was refused because his initial appeal against conviction had been dealt with before the Cadder ruling was issued and it could not therefore be reopened.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-15863085

Why on earth are Mitchell's supporters still going on about Cadder when it is perfectly obvious that it is a non-starter legally because it has all been dealt with already.

So English judges are in legal agreement with Scottish judges and I believe that an attempt to take it to Europe also hit a brick wall as well.

What sort of ego trip is Sandra Lean indulging herself with here.  She is causing nothing but mischief as far as I can see.  I don't think she is helping Mitchell one iota in fact as far as getting some sort of future parole once his twenty years is up I think she has been the kiss of death.  Which is as I think it should be - but isn't she actually supposed to be. on his side.

What her obsessive antics must be doing to Jodi's family and material witnesses who probably need to put all the trauma behind them and get on with their lives can only be imagined.

Apparently - according to Sandra Lean - Luke Mitchell’s psychological assessments suggest he doesn’t have any mental health issues

What do they say regarding a personality disorder ?

Maybe this needs its own thread ?

Luke Mitchell told Roslyn Little in 2018 he was ‘suicidal’ - is this information included in his prison psychology records and if not why not?

Also the ‘allegations’ from the girls who came forward to say he had threatened them with a knife?

Luke Mitchell’s prison psychology assessments should be reflective of these factors and if they aren’t then they aren’t up to date

What is the name of the minister in Scotland who deals with these matters ? Is it Keith Brown?

[faithlilly]

He sacked his lawyers - and he failed to get any others on board - and it his hardly surprising is it not? - That we had the three amigos trying to tell all of those professionals how to do their Job? - and it would not have meant he was simply released. There would have had, to have been a hell of a lot shown which proved beyond reasonable doubt that breach. He did have a responsible adult with him, a social worker. And he was not intimidated in the slightest in the interview, any of them. - It would have started a process, not a simple release from or instant over turning of his conviction. If it were that simple - the jail gates would be open and thousands of people walking free. They are handled by merit, are they not? Cadder was pressured into admitting things without legal guidance. - And at the time of LM's interviews - It was many years before this ruling in 2010. So many variables. And regardless of police tactics - LM still took control. There has never been any denial of the behaviour on behalf of the police - well thought through when allowed to be used at trial. to show clearly that it did no phase LM, that he was pressured into nothing - And the ruling is used by many guilty people, as a means of trying to escape on a technicality. -  There are people who due to this breach, were pressured into given evidence that solely brought about their conviction. - Not in LM's case it did not?

‘So, with this it is - to hang with all the evidence that convicted him - she is claiming that by the skin of his teeth - he could have been released on some technical area of law? “

Of course we now know from the experts that that’s exactly what would have happened.

[Nicholas]

‘So, with this it is - to hang with all the evidence that convicted him - she is claiming that by the skin of his teeth - he could have been released on some technical area of law? “

Of course we now know from the experts that that’s exactly what would have happened.

You have no idea if ‘that’s exactly what would have happened’

It’s highly unlikely a dangerous individual like Luke Mitchell would have walked after what he did to [Name removed]

[faithlilly]

You have no idea if ‘that’s exactly what would have happened’

It’s highly unlikely a dangerous individual like Luke Mitchell would have walked after what he did to [Name removed]

From your own post.

“ In a move that will signal an astonishing escalation in the row over the independence of Scots Law, the senior solicitors insist judges in London will have no choice but to recommend freeing him on the grounds his human rights were breached. 
Mitchell, now 22, was sentenced to life in 2005 for murdering his girlfriend, Jodi, 14, in Dalkeith, Midlothian, two years before.
But he is claiming his trial was unfair because he had no access to a lawyer during interview, which has since been declared a breach of EU human rights under the controversial Cadder ruling.”

So yes we do know.

[Nicholas]

From your own post.

“ In a move that will signal an astonishing escalation in the row over the independence of Scots Law, the senior solicitors insist judges in London will have no choice but to recommend freeing him on the grounds his human rights were breached. 
Mitchell, now 22, was sentenced to life in 2005 for murdering his girlfriend, Jodi, 14, in Dalkeith, Midlothian, two years before.
But he is claiming his trial was unfair because he had no access to a lawyer during interview, which has since been declared a breach of EU human rights under the controversial Cadder ruling.”

So yes we do know.

No ‘we’ don’t ⬇️

When does Sandra Lean say Luke Mitchell confessed?

‘Seven supreme court justices will sit to consider the issue. Their decision will have significant ramifications for thousands of prosecutions pending in Scotland, and indeed many thousands of convictions already secured where confession evidence of this type was used at trial.

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2010/may/23/scottish-law-supreme-court-confession

[TruthSeeker2003]

She has stated that he had no psychological assessments as he wasn't guilty

[Nicholas]

She has stated that he had no psychological assessments as he wasn't guilty

[7] The appellant was interviewed by the police on several occasions, at first as a witness and then as a suspect. He denied any involvement in the murder. He said that he had been at home at the time. That remained his position at the trial, and later when he was interviewed for a social enquiry report.[/b]
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=26ab8aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7



[9].....The reports available to the trial judge suggested that the appellant had a fairly comfortable home life, and had hobbies such as horse-riding and motorcycling. Despite their separation, both parents appear to have taken part in his upbringing. They were united in disapproving of his use of cannabis.[/b]


Although Corinne apparently smoked cannabis herself?


[10] The appellant at first did well at school but latterly got into trouble and fought with other pupils. The school referred him to an educational psychologist, who monitored his transition from primary to secondary school. His mother also arranged for him to attend a different secondary school from the one to which his primary school contemporaries were to go. He did well for the first two years at secondary school, but then his performance deteriorated. His teachers had concerns about matters such as homework and school uniform. He began to get involved in fights again. He expressed an interest in satanism that was reflected in his essays and in graffiti on his schoolbooks. His English teacher was sufficiently concerned to refer the matter to a guidance teacher. There was also evidence that he was interested in knives. He regularly smoked cannabis. By the time of the murder, he was smoking it every day during and after school. He bought it in bulk and shared it with friends, including the deceased. Following the murder, he was segregated from other pupils, and was eventually excluded.

[12] The defence submitted a report by a consultant forensic clinical psychiatrist who concluded that the appellant was not suffering from mental disorder within the meaning of the Mental Health (Scotland) Act 1984. There was no evidence of severe emotional maladjustment or childhood abuse or of significant abnormality of mind at the time of the murder.


Was Luke Mitchell diagnosed with a personality disorder ?

[Nicholas]

This is disgusting, and there is no excuse for this kind of behaviour by "campaigners"------threatening people, defacing property, etc etc.

The perpetrator of the threat was ‘a professional who wasn’t known to the police’ apparently

They are now