Luke Mitchell - All quiet?

[Moggrey21]

All seems to have gone very quiet on this topic..i keep checking. Was the common consensus finally that he's guilty as sin and we can move on :-)

[Chris_Halkides]

The prosecution asks the public to believe in certain things.  One, that a fourteen year old boy can cleanse himself of all forensic traces and do so in an extremely short time.  Two, that the many...irregularities...in gathering the eywitness evidence should be overlooked.  Three, that intimidating potential defense witnesses is acceptable.  Four, that failing to collect objective evidence (evidence that is not malleable in the way that eyewitness evidence is) regarding this case is unworthy of its attention.  I am skeptical on all four counts.   

[Mr Apples]

Not got as much time to post these days, but, coincidentally, I have a week off work starting from today, so I might make a few contributions to the boards during this time (if you can call it that). The transcripts have reinforced my belief that he is guilty, but interestingly enough, the most recent transcripts that have been uploaded -- that of pushbike boys DH and GE -- have thrown a little  sneaky cat amongst the pigeons. Why? Cos it means the 3 pushbike boys' (AH's transcript was uploaded a few months ago) testimonies all differ from each other: AH was adamant that LM was wearing a waist-length German army shirt; DH was sure LM was wearing a shiny green bomber jacket with orange lining (though he did concede it was possible he was getting said bomber jacket mixed up because he had seen LM wearing it at school before); and GE said he was 100% certain that LM was wearing the shiny green bomber jacket with the orange lining. These 3 boys' testimonies are a bit anomalous, but don't sway my opinion. Guilty.

[Chris_Halkides]

It had been thought by some that Luke found Jodi's body without Mia's help, but the trial transcripts holed this assertion below the waterline.

[faithlilly]

Not got as much time to post these days, but, coincidentally, I have a week off work starting from today, so I might make a few contributions to the boards during this time (if you can call it that). The transcripts have reinforced my belief that he is guilty, but interestingly enough, the most recent transcripts that have been uploaded -- that of pushbike boys DH and GE -- have thrown a little  sneaky cat amongst the pigeons. Why? Cos it means the 3 pushbike boys' (AH's transcript was uploaded a few months ago) testimonies all differ from each other: AH was adamant that LM was wearing a waist-length German army shirt; DH was sure LM was wearing a shiny green bomber jacket with orange lining (though he did concede it was possible he was getting said bomber jacket mixed up because he had seen LM wearing it at school before); and GE said he was 100% certain that LM was wearing the shiny green bomber jacket with the orange lining. These 3 boys' testimonies are a bit anomalous, but don't sway my opinion. Guilty.

“ Cos it means the 3 pushbike boys' (AH's transcript was uploaded a few months ago) testimonies all differ from each other:”

Not true. Two of the boys absolutely agree with each other and those are the boys who knew Luke best.

Their testimony is interesting in that it clearly displays the manipulation of rather naive teenagers by Turnbull’s questioning.

[Parky41]

All seems to have gone very quiet on this topic..i keep checking. Was the common consensus finally that he's guilty as sin and we can move on :-)

What's changed? - Confirmation that SM had not seen nor heard his brother. Confirmation that he had been influenced into telling lies by his own mother. Confirmation that SM had not left home around 5:30pm but after 6:20pm. Where he still didn't see his brother around the entrance of the estate. Confirmation that it was after 6:30pm when LM was seen by the cyclist on his return journey. Confirmation that LM had not been seen sitting on the wall at the entrance of his estate, at any time. Though he claimed to be there for the best part of 80mins. Only walking to and from Barondale Cottages (claimed) twice he said. No evidence at all of him walking to and from there.

Confirmation that all the sightings of him had not been of him wearing his bomber jacket. Confirmation in everything put forward by F&W that the sighting took place at the wooden gate. Seeing the jogger 'further down the hill'  Confirmation that the two boys who knew him may possibly have confused his jacket for the one they were familiar with. Confirmation that we are still left with no sightings of LM for the best part of 70mins, where he claimed to be. Confirmation that 5 people saw LM wearing something other than his bomber jacket. 3 (so far) in places he claimed not to have been.

Confirmation that LM had lied, that his dog had not alerted him to where the victims body lay, direction of. Confirmation that the only time the dog was up at the wall was the Gino break, then directly to and at the V break. Confirmation that no alert took place past this point, confirmation that LM did not double back to anywhere. Confirmation that he had lied when claiming he knew nothing of those breaks until with the others searching. Confirmation that he had walked down into that woodland towards the V break before with others. He was familiar with the woodland. Confirmation that in excess of 8 people testified to LM wearing a khaki green, parka style jacket pre the murder. Confirmation of LM carrying knives frequently, confirmation of a missing knife. Confirmation that a fire was taken place in the Mitchell garden at different intervals that evening.

Confirmation that LM went home around 10pm and not just after 9pm. Confirmation of his many multiple missing time frames. Confirmation of his changing accounts. Confirmation of his compulsive lies. Confirmation that that he did not meet with the others at the junction of the paths. Confirmation that he had not rushed up any path. Confirmation that there is a missing time frame again, from his arrival at the path (claimed by him), to his meeting the others after 11:20pm. Confirmation that it took approx 5 1/2 mins from heading off together, to LM entering the woodland and calling out he had found his "something" Seconds in the woodland to find and identify a body, through trees, overgrowth, name tree by type the victim lay behind, her hair fastener etc.

Confirmation that LM had not borrowed a torch from his brother, SM knew nothing was amiss until awakened (claimed) by his mother in the early hours of July 1st. Confirmation that LM had not been stripped and forensically examined all over by the time of his mothers arrival at the police station. Confirmation that she was with her son when handing over that first account. Confirmation that LM asked if SM were home? Confirmation that he deleted the data from his phone and not the police. Confirmation he omitted the contact to the Jones house, being told Jodi had left already ("a wee while ago"), Conflicting accounts as to why he did nothing.

So, yes. Nothing much changed. Alibi exposed as false. Sightings still firmly in place elsewhere. The dog did not alert and show him where the victims body was, he made up position, reason and so forth, in his attempt to make it appear so. Still missing clothing, knife. Still fuelled to the brim with lies. But all in all, what has been exposed is a farce of a campaign overflowing with dishonesty. Where multiple innocents have been used as fodder to bring favour for LM. Is he innocent? I don't believe so. Was the evidence sufficient for a conviction? That will always be up for debate. It in no way shows nor proves in the slightest, that LM did not and could not have murdered Jodi Jones, imo.

[faithlilly]

What's changed? - Confirmation that SM had not seen nor heard his brother. Confirmation that he had been influenced into telling lies by his own mother. Confirmation that SM had not left home around 5:30pm but after 6:20pm. Where he still didn't see his brother around the entrance of the estate. Confirmation that it was after 6:30pm when LM was seen by the cyclist on his return journey. Confirmation that LM had not been seen sitting on the wall at the entrance of his estate, at any time. Though he claimed to be there for the best part of 80mins. Only walking to and from Barondale Cottages (claimed) twice he said. No evidence at all of him walking to and from there.

Confirmation that all the sightings of him had not been of him wearing his bomber jacket. Confirmation in everything put forward by F&W that the sighting took place at the wooden gate. Seeing the jogger 'further down the hill'  Confirmation that the two boys who knew him may possibly have confused his jacket for the one they were familiar with. Confirmation that we are still left with no sightings of LM for the best part of 70mins, where he claimed to be. Confirmation that 5 people saw LM wearing something other than his bomber jacket. 3 (so far) in places he claimed not to have been.

Confirmation that LM had lied, that his dog had not alerted him to where the victims body lay, direction of. Confirmation that the only time the dog was up at the wall was the Gino break, then directly to and at the V break. Confirmation that no alert took place past this point, confirmation that LM did not double back to anywhere. Confirmation that he had lied when claiming he knew nothing of those breaks until with the others searching. Confirmation that he had walked down into that woodland towards the V break before with others. He was familiar with the woodland. Confirmation that in excess of 8 people testified to LM wearing a khaki green, parka style jacket pre the murder. Confirmation of LM carrying knives frequently, confirmation of a missing knife. Confirmation that a fire was taken place in the Mitchell garden at different intervals that evening.

Confirmation that LM went home around 10pm and not just after 9pm. Confirmation of his many multiple missing time frames. Confirmation of his changing accounts. Confirmation of his compulsive lies. Confirmation that that he did not meet with the others at the junction of the paths. Confirmation that he had not rushed up any path. Confirmation that there is a missing time frame again, from his arrival at the path (claimed by him), to his meeting the others after 11:20pm. Confirmation that it took approx 5 1/2 mins from heading off together, to LM entering the woodland and calling out he had found his "something" Seconds in the woodland to find and identify a body, through trees, overgrowth, name tree by type the victim lay behind, her hair fastener etc.

Confirmation that LM had not borrowed a torch from his brother, SM knew nothing was amiss until awakened (claimed) by his mother in the early hours of July 1st. Confirmation that LM had not been stripped and forensically examined all over by the time of his mothers arrival at the police station. Confirmation that she was with her son when handing over that first account. Confirmation that LM asked if SM were home? Confirmation that he deleted the data from his phone and not the police. Confirmation he omitted the contact to the Jones house, being told Jodi had left already ("a wee while ago"), Conflicting accounts as to why he did nothing.

So, yes. Nothing much changed. Alibi exposed as false. Sightings still firmly in place elsewhere. The dog did not alert and show him where the victims body was, he made up position, reason and so forth, in his attempt to make it appear so. Still missing clothing, knife. Still fuelled to the brim with lies. But all in all, what has been exposed is a farce of a campaign overflowing with dishonesty. Where multiple innocents have been used as fodder to bring favour for LM. Is he innocent? I don't believe so. Was the evidence sufficient for a conviction? That will always be up for debate. It in no way shows nor proves in the slightest, that LM did not and could not have murdered Jodi Jones, imo.

Shall we start at the beginning and correct your misinformation?


You said : ‘ Only walking to and from Barondale Cottages (claimed) twice he said. No evidence at all of him walking to and from there’

From Dean Houston’s testimony:

“As you go down Newbattle Road you eventually come to an opening on your left which is to Newbattle Abbey Crescent-Yes
Do you know where that is?- Yes
And just before there is another opening, do you know that one also? -Yes
I think it is signposted for Barndale Cottages-Yes
 
And further

On the evening of Monday 30th of June then after going to the Morning, Noon and Nighy shop you and two friends cycled along Newbattle Road in the direction which would take you past the opening?- Yes
As you passed the opening did you see anyone? -Yes
Who did you see?-Luke Mitchell

[Parky41]

Shall we start at the beginning and correct your misinformation?


You said : ‘ Only walking to and from Barondale Cottages (claimed) twice he said. No evidence at all of him walking to and from there’

From Dean Houston’s testimony:

“As you go down Newbattle Road you eventually come to an opening on your left which is to Newbattle Abbey Crescent-Yes
Do you know where that is?- Yes
And just before there is another opening, do you know that one also? -Yes
I think it is signposted for Barndale Cottages-Yes
 
And further

On the evening of Monday 30th of June then after going to the Morning, Noon and Nighy shop you and two friends cycled along Newbattle Road in the direction which would take you past the opening?- Yes
As you passed the opening did you see anyone? -Yes
Who did you see?-Luke Mitchell

Would you like it slowly? No evidence of LM walking to and from BC. No evidence of LM sitting on the wall at the entrance of his estate. Then familiarize yourself with the entrances. There are 5 between the wooden gate (F&W) and entrance to the estate. 1st into the woodland, second BC? 3rd house, 4th walkway that takes you along by the river, alternate, more hidden route into the housing estate, then the entrance to Newbattle Abbey Cres. The wall at the entrance of his estate, nice and low for sitting on (claimed). Others, leaning against. There is a further clue in the testimony, I'll leave you to try and spot it? Again, absolutely no sightings (yet) on the wall sitting at estate entrance, no sightings of him walking up or down from anywhere. At a standstill?

[faithlilly]

Would you like it slowly? No evidence of LM walking to and from BC. No evidence of LM sitting on the wall at the entrance of his estate. Then familiarize yourself with the entrances. There are 5 between the wooden gate (F&W) and entrance to the estate. 1st into the woodland, second BC? 3rd house, 4th walkway that takes you along by the river, alternate, more hidden route into the housing estate, then the entrance to Newbattle Abbey Cres. The wall at the entrance of his estate, nice and low for sitting on (claimed). Others, leaning against. There is a further clue in the testimony, I'll leave you to try and spot it? Again, absolutely no sightings (yet) on the wall sitting at estate entrance, no sightings of him walking up or down from anywhere. At a standstill?

The same old Parky!

Don’t believe your lying eyes!

Turnbull tells you the sequence of openings. First Barondale Cottages then Newbattle Abbey Crescent. As to Luke not being seen walking to the turning to Barondale Cottages, how do you think that he got there?

[Parky41]

The same old Parky!

Don’t believe your lying eyes!

Turnbull tells you the sequence of openings. First Barondale Cottages then Newbattle Abbey Crescent. As to Luke not being seen walking to the turning to Barondale Cottages, how do you think that he got there?

A simple admission of your wrong would have sufficed Faith. Now toddle off (again) on to Google maps, familiarize yourself (again), with those 5 entry points. Then be a good girl and pop up evidence of LM sitting on the wall, where he claimed to be for the best part of 80mins. Handy however, don't you think, that entry point that keeps you away from those other obtuse claims, you know, where one could not possibly get passed all those big windows without being seen? Possibly correct, he wasn't seen walking to the entrance of his estate either - Oops.

[faithlilly]

A simple admission of your wrong would have sufficed Faith. Now toddle off (again) on to Google maps, familiarize yourself (again), with those 5 entry points. Then be a good girl and pop up evidence of LM sitting on the wall, where he claimed to be for the best part of 80mins. Handy however, don't you think, that entry point that keeps you away from those other obtuse claims, you know, where one could not possibly get passed all those big windows without being seen? Possibly correct, he wasn't seen walking to the entrance of his estate either - Oops.

You are quite right Parky. The entrance to  Barondale Cottages wasn’t the next opening from Newbattle Abbey Crescent but the second, so actually Luke walked further than I thought.

Luke’s defence claimed that he walked as far as Barondale Cottages so I’m not sure why you keep on insisting that
it was claimed Luke sat on the wall for 80 minutes?

From Grant Elliot’s testimony.
And as you go down NB Road and you come eventually to some houses on the left called NB Abbey Crescent? Yes
And just before there is an opening and a sign that says Barndale Cottages, did you know that (inaudible) ( Inaudible’

Further
You will recognise that as the opening that I have just mentioned? Yes
As you cycled down NB Road did you see anybody you knew near that opening? Yes
Who was that? Luke Mitchell.


Now hopefully that’ll put the silliness to bed that Luke didn’t walk as far as Barondale Cottages.

And as to Luke’s apparel, Maureen O’Sullivan and her partner testified:

“Defence witness Marion O'Sullivan, 36, told the trial she saw a male who looked "suspicious" standing at a pathway entrance on Newbattle Road, Dalkeith, just before 1800 on the day Jodi died.

She said the man, who was in his "late teens or early 20s", was wearing a green bomber jacket and dark jeans.”

“Her partner Derek Hamilton, 31, who had been driving the car with MsO'Sullivan past the spot in question, also gave a similar description of the male he saw.”

So 4 people described the male they saw, obviously Luke, wearing a bomber jacket. Two wouldn’t have known the jacket from school so bang goes Turnbull’s theory.

Only Walsh and Fleming, of all the individuals who passed along NB Road that night, describe seeing a male in a parka.


Lastly if Shane left NB Abbey Crescent and turned left at 6.20 and Luke was at Barondale Cottages at that time as Grant Elliot testified to then it wouldn’t be suspicious at all that he didn’t see his brother.

[Parky41]

You are quite right Parky. The entrance to  Barondale Cottages wasn’t the next opening from Newbattle Abbey Crescent but the second, so actually Luke walked further than I thought.

Luke’s defence claimed that he walked as far as Barondale Cottages so I’m not sure why you keep on insisting that
it was claimed Luke sat on the wall for 80 minutes?

From Grant Elliot’s testimony.
And as you go down NB Road and you come eventually to some houses on the left called NB Abbey Crescent? Yes
And just before there is an opening and a sign that says Barndale Cottages, did you know that (inaudible) ( Inaudible’

Further
You will recognise that as the opening that I have just mentioned? Yes
As you cycled down NB Road did you see anybody you knew near that opening? Yes
Who was that? Luke Mitchell.


Now hopefully that’ll put the silliness to bed that Luke didn’t walk as far as Barondale Cottages.

And as to Luke’s apparel, Maureen O’Sullivan and her partner testified:

“Defence witness Marion O'Sullivan, 36, told the trial she saw a male who looked "suspicious" standing at a pathway entrance on Newbattle Road, Dalkeith, just before 1800 on the day Jodi died.

She said the man, who was in his "late teens or early 20s", was wearing a green bomber jacket and dark jeans.”

“Her partner Derek Hamilton, 31, who had been driving the car with MsO'Sullivan past the spot in question, also gave a similar description of the male he saw.”

So 4 people described the male they saw, obviously Luke, wearing a bomber jacket. Two wouldn’t have known the jacket from school so bang goes Turnbull’s theory.

Only Walsh and Fleming, of all the individuals who passed along NB Road that night, describe seeing a male in a parka.


Lastly if Shane left NB Abbey Crescent and turned left at 6.20 and Luke was at Barondale Cottages at that time as Grant Elliot testified to then it wouldn’t be suspicious at all that he didn’t see his brother.

"The opening is obviously created by a gap between the stone wall and the left hand corner we can see is painted white. You may know the right hand one is also painted white" From the boys testimony. But you knew that anyway. Playing silly beggars as per.

SM easily seeing to there from the estate entrance when leaving that day.

Again - No evidence of LM walking to the estate entrance at any time. No evidence of LM sitting on the wall at the entrance, did SL not mention the bus stop also? ( I know, damn). No evidence of LM walking back and forth to Barondale cottages at any time, from where he claimed to have been waiting for the best part of 80mins.

[faithlilly]

"The opening is obviously created by a gap between the stone wall and the left hand corner we can see is painted white. You may know the right hand one is also painted white" From the boys testimony. But you knew that anyway. Playing silly beggars as per.

SM easily seeing to there from the estate entrance when leaving that day.

Again - No evidence of LM walking to the estate entrance at any time. No evidence of LM sitting on the wall at the entrance, did SL not mention the bus stop also? ( I know, damn). No evidence of LM walking back and forth to Barondale cottages at any time, from where he claimed to have been waiting for the best part of 80mins.

There are two openings after NB Abbey Cresent. Both seem to lead to Barondale Cottages. Both are just feet apart. One now has white painted ends…I don’t know if it was like that in 2003. The pertinent point was that where the boys saw Luke was at the opening signposted Barondale Cottages. Further if Luke had been standing a little back into the opening it is quite possible that Shane wouldn’t have seen him as he turned left coming out of the street.

For the moment let’s put Dr Lean’s book aside and concentrate on the court testimony. BTW who saw Jodi walk to the entrance to RDP?

[Parky41]

There are two openings after NB Abbey Cresent. Both seem to lead to Barondale Cottages. Both are just feet apart. One now has white painted ends…I don’t know if it was like that in 2003. The pertinent point was that where the boys saw Luke was at the opening signposted Barondale Cottages. Further if Luke had been standing a little back into the opening it is quite possible that Shane wouldn’t have seen him as he turned left coming out of the street.

For the moment let’s put Dr Lean’s book aside and concentrate on the court testimony. BTW who saw Jodi walk to the entrance to RDP?

And again, playing silly beggars - It is AT who is describing the white painted entrance. There are 4 entrances after NAC, and before the wooden gate of the F&W sighting. I have no idea why you continuously wish to make a fool of yourself, but do so anyway. Excellent as that may be, do it with someone else. You were wrong, stop playing the part of your wounded alter ego.

[faithlilly]

And again, playing silly beggars - It is AT who is describing the white painted entrance. There are 4 entrances after NAC, and before the wooden gate of the F&W sighting. I have no idea why you continuously wish to make a fool of yourself, but do so anyway. Excellent as that may be, do it with someone else. You were wrong, stop playing the part of your wounded alter ego.

It matters not a jot whether there are four or four hundred openings before the wooden gate alleged sighting. The opening Turnbull was talking about, and he specifically mentioned the signpost, was to Barondale Cottages. From Google earth the sign post seems to no longer be there.

If Luke was not at the Barondale Cottage opening who did the 3 boys, Caroline Heatlie, Maureen O’Sullivan et al see standing at the opening?