The less talked about sighting on N’battle Rd by M O’Sullivan & D Hamilton...

[William Wallace]

No-one on this forum is "trying to prove Mitchell guilty" of murdering Jodi.  That has already been achieved in the properly constituted legal setting of a court with judge and jury - and appeal courts in front of law lords - not in the kangaroo setting of the internet where anything goes.

Nothing destroys a forum more than unadulterated rudeness - perhaps it behoves you to give that some thought particularly as it also breaks forum protocol.

No it doesn't break forum protocol. Nothing rude about it. Stating facts only breaks protocol in communist China. This "devil worshipper", "he burned the jacket", "he washed in the river" nonsense has been going on since the Daily Star first printed it in July 2003. Do you not think that's long enough to talk about something that was invented to sell newspapers? This tends to come from the same people who know nothing about the case except what they've swallowed from the media, who then post comments referring to Mitchell's interest in Satanism, and in such things as Manson and his music which are just fabrications. Then they use these to say he is guilty. That's not a forum for opinions it's just a boring dictatorship controlled by people forcing their own agenda down other people's throats. Pointless.

[William Wallace]

Firstly from what you first stated - this just minutes between. These sightings were anywhere in the region of 17-20mins between. They were never inclusive of the sighting by F&W. You really need to make your mind up about this Parka - it was or it wasn't. - The trouble with these multiple areas of reasoning - they are as hot as a cat's paws on a tin roof. As was LM's testimony from the early hours of July 1st. - One needs to be consistent. And at no point have I, or anyone else claimed, that I have seen - That LM arrived at the Abbey at 7.30pm.  What has always been maintained by myself, is this time period of 5.32pm until 7.30pm when he met with the boys in the Abbey grounds. 

That LM in that split moment of having just crossed Newbattle R'd was spotted once by F&W, at around 5.40pm at thee gate.
You either accept the parka here or you don't - you either agree with SL or you don't. That MK was out jogging with a parka on and that he was LM's twin - which gives us two people who looked identical on Newbattle Road at the same time. Or you twist this sighting to 'if is was to choose a Jacket I'd pick the parka' as meaning it was not. 

Of these sightings multiple times - in that small frame of time. From around 6pm until 6.15pm. -  That when he needed to be seen, to be waiting for Jodi, he was seen multiple times in and around 15-20mins, from around 6pm. That's quite some some doing is it not? To be seen that many times, twice by the same boys - yet nothing, by his reckoning from 5.32pm until nearly 6pm. - and around 6.15pm until in the boys company at 7.30pm.

He is (claiming) on this road, at it's busiest time. And by your reckoning seen by no-one until nearly 6pm, not even his own brother. And we know that he, by his admission was at the entrance of this estate, when he made the call to the Jones's, at 5.32pm. And we know by the above, by the boys from school etc - That he did not go near Barondale Cottages until between 6pm until 6.15pm. (at Barondale and the entrance of the estate) And there is no gate at these cottages visible from the Road? So please, do not attempt to tie these sightings together. It was not an entrance, pathway and a gate rolled into one. So we have no sighting by SM when he left his house, not on his drive to the entrance and upon his exit onto Newbattle R'd did he see his brother LM.  LM was not at the entrance of his estate and from his house at 5.30pm until around 6pm. And outwith this sighting by F&W there is nothing that puts him on Newbattle R'd until around 6pm.

*The trouble with this ambiguity of changing from a path (Mr Apples and RDP), the gate (F&W)  First there is no gate at Barondale cottage. There is a drive/ entrance. This pathway is the continuation of the Esk Walk way.This entrance is just down from the gate by F&W and between the entrance to the cottage and here. Clearly signposted with the usual walkway, green sign. As it is at the West End of RDP itself.

This tells us how busy this R'd was at this time of day. That from around 6.15pm until he was actually in the presence of these boys in the Abbey - there is nothing, not a snifter of LM. - Nothing on Newbattle R'd, nothing in the Abbey. This is not only a residential college it is also an industrial estate. Cars and people coming and going at all times. - Fluke perhaps? What is a fluke and a blessing was it not - That in that brief moment of having to cross this R'd, of needing to get rid of that clothing. He was spotted by F&W.

From this sighting by F&W, does one imagine that LM would simply doddle home for a change. He needed off this road and out of sight. He could have accessed this woodland from behind the gate. An area he knew like the back of his hand. Just down from this gate and up from Barondale cottages is the continuation of the Esk Walk way. In this wood land there are many smaller paths. There are several entrances along here, into the estate where LM stayed. And one can mock as much as one must - There is nothing better than an area of dense woodland, and a river for initial cleansing. For his feet, hands, face hair. And no one is suggesting that at this point he took the time to do lots of things, time was very much of the essence. LM needed a change of clothing, and he needed to be seen, to be seen waiting for Jodi.When one wants to talk of mere minutes - mere minutes is all that was required - this 17mins plus. To spend a little time at this river, to dash home. To access his back garden - this only becomes undoable when we have these claims, that he was soaked in blood, that he entered his house as such in this state. That he showered to remove this blood he is imagined to be dripping with - He simply was not was he? F&W in that instant picked up on no blood. They did however pick up on how dodgy he appeared. We do not even know if LM had entered his house at all? do we? - We know he needed help, and we know there was burning going on at different intervals, over the course of the evening. That outer clothing very much kept out of the house? Did his mother hand him clean clothing? - This detached home with a garage on one side and a pathway on the other? 

And for all of this one can go into Google Earth - they can see this gate (metal now), they can see the Esk walkway sign and entrance and they can see Barondale cottage and they can also see his house - the garage and the path. LM's house pretty sheltered at the front also, trees and shrubbery. It would have taken LM less than a minute to dash from this woodland to his front garden. - What is interesting however, is this sighting at this path entrance around 6pm. Back through the woods? Planking the knife? - however, those timings. We know at a brisk walk only, it takes less than 7mins to get from LM's house to this path. One can cut this time considerably when one is running, through this woodland, can they not. By quite a bit. Half the time. - And it was doable, as LM did it - he was certainly proven to have. But most came after this did it not? - that missing time frame, from around 6.15pm. Of getting the story set in motion. Of this claimed arrival home at around 9pm. Of being seen entering his house at 10pm. Of Jodi not being discovered over the course of this evening. Of it getting to a certain time then setting this search story in place. - scuppered by the meet of the search trio - on this path. As stated also. It is one thing going into a rage and killing someone in that heat of the moment - it is entirely different covering up - So many factors were already set firmly in motion - That earlier meet, only the beginning.   

And we are also forgetting all and everything else - Those lies, that story of alibi, of claiming to have been meeting with Jodi at 6pm. Of not calling back. Of in reality being on this Road for nearly 90mins waiting not 45mins. Of calling the boys back, of looking cleaner than usual. Of this isolated path he claimed she was walking and did not appear at the other end of. Of Jodi leaving at a much earlier time for this meet. And this is only a fraction of the information - of AB, of the male looking confrontational. These palms out turned beckoning the girl. Of the missing knife with the brown handle -- and so much more. And of these claims in recent times, of LM not wearing jackets, he hated them. Of the picture with multiple jackets on his bedroom door. Of wearing this thick blouson jkt on this 'sunny warm summers night' Of not just wanting any old jacket, it had to be a parka, bought due to it being in a sale. Of the cock and bull story of the knife handed into Beumont - that CM claimed was in a bag under the dog stand - of this professional search team, running their fingers through the dogs dinner, and missing the bag beside them. That this knife was a replacement bought online. Did they not have any brown handled ones in stock? - Of trying to replace these items in some vain hope that this would go unnoticed - of the vixen in the hen house. Of the police watching the Mitchells, Of being there to ask what shopping had been bought - Oh, guess what, it's a parka.  See the trouble with this Faithlilly - is the police had not asked LM about a parka jacket by this point. LM knew however he needed to replace it.

And as stated, there is so much more - tunnel vision indeed?  And we can see clearly why, he remained suspect. Why one family was believed over the other. - For one was clearly lying from the start.

Not the "he cleaned up in the river" old chestnut again, with the "he changed his clothes in the garden" added on now?? . This is someone of 14 you're talking about not Peter Tobin.

If you actually want to really figure this out you will need to remove all knowledge of what Mitchell may have done or not done, because it wasn't him that did it. I'm not leaving breadcrumbs because even that would probably get me banned. The key word is "motive". Nothing else I can say.

[William Wallace]

Merely pointing out that your suggestion that Mitchell walked naked to his house after murdering Jodi is a non starter and would definitely have attracted unwanted attention.

That was a joke to highlight the stupidity of claims he chucked his clothes in the river.

[William Wallace]

No-one claimed he burned shorts although he might very well have done so.  The issue is that a particular jacket he was known to possess vanished as if in a puff of smoke and independent witnesses with no axe to grind confirmed that the log burner was used that night but emitting an odd smell - therefore definitely not logs.

The vanishing jacket vanished because it never existed. The only trace of anything being burnt in that log burner was....logs. Why do people still talk about that (serious question) when it was forensically tested and not even 1 fibre from clothing found? Has he now found a way of beating forensic science in log burners as well as murder scenes and in houses? Who is this guy? Is he Superman or Merlin the Magician?

[WakeyWakey]

The vanishing jacket vanished because it never existed.

and those multiple people that gave statements to the police saying otherwise were all lying? people whod spent time at his house, in his room, over the new year 6 months or so before and seen it?

[Paranoid Android]

It's been said before - a cut from behind or at an angle could lessen the chances of being hit by any arterial spray.

LM carried a knife, presumably for use for whatever reason - it went missing around the time of the murder - is that right? Is that not a concern?

[Brietta]

No it doesn't break forum protocol. Nothing rude about it. Stating facts only breaks protocol in communist China. This "devil worshipper", "he burned the jacket", "he washed in the river" nonsense has been going on since the Daily Star first printed it in July 2003. Do you not think that's long enough to talk about something that was invented to sell newspapers? This tends to come from the same people who know nothing about the case except what they've swallowed from the media, who then post comments referring to Mitchell's interest in Satanism, and in such things as Manson and his music which are just fabrications. Then they use these to say he is guilty. That's not a forum for opinions it's just a boring dictatorship controlled by people forcing their own agenda down other people's throats. Pointless.

Jodi Jones's horrible death was not invented to sell newspapers.  Nor was the police investigation into her death which resulted in the emergence of a prime suspect or the subsequent trial by jury invented to sell newspapers.

There are indeed one or two posters here intent on "forcing their own agenda down other people's throats" - I suggest you give consideration to that observation and analyse your posts before pressing the 'post' button not after.

[Brietta]

Not the "he cleaned up in the river" old chestnut again, with the "he changed his clothes in the garden" added on now?? . This is someone of 14 you're talking about not Peter Tobin.

If you actually want to really figure this out you will need to remove all knowledge of what Mitchell may have done or not done, because it wasn't him that did it. I'm not leaving breadcrumbs because even that would probably get me banned. The key word is "motive". Nothing else I can say.

Peter Tobin was fourteen once.

[Brietta]

That was a joke to highlight the stupidity of claims he chucked his clothes in the river.

I found your 'joke' rude and since I was responding to your post perhaps you should take a bit more care how you phrase content.

[Brietta]

The vanishing jacket vanished because it never existed. The only trace of anything being burnt in that log burner was....logs. Why do people still talk about that (serious question) when it was forensically tested and not even 1 fibre from clothing found? Has he now found a way of beating forensic science in log burners as well as murder scenes and in houses? Who is this guy? Is he Superman or Merlin the Magician?

Don't you ever stop to wonder why witnesses who have testified under oath are all liars if their testimony fails to agree with your narrative.

There are independent witnesses to the fact that Mitchell owned a parka which was exactly the same as the replacement bought by his mother after Jodi's murder.

At least you have moved on from denial that the log burner was - as witnesses testified - in use the night Jodi was murdered, I suppose that is something.

[Brietta]

It's been said before - a cut from behind or at an angle could lessen the chances of being hit by any arterial spray.

LM carried a knife, presumably for use for whatever reason - it went missing around the time of the murder - is that right? Is that not a concern?

Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm doing this from memory.
I believe Jodi's blood had sprayed on the wall.  The killer stroke was the one which severed her carotid artery and forensics suggested that she was kneeling facing the wall when it was delivered and that her killer must have been behind her when it was delivered.
Thus minimising contamination from arterial spray and the other savage slashes to her neck.

I don't think Mitchell would have presented as blood soaked as we are led to believe if the penetrating wounds on Jodi's living body had been delivered from behind.

[Mr Apples]

and those multiple people that gave statements to the police saying otherwise were all lying? people whod spent time at his house, in his room, over the new year 6 months or so before and seen it?

Interesting. Do you have a cite for this? A link? Did these people testify in court for the prosecution? I remember reading in an article that a former teacher of LM’s said Luke owned a green parka jacket prior to the murder and that he used to joke about it, saying it made LM look akin to a monk. More incriminating evidence, if this is all true.

[faithlilly]

and those multiple people that gave statements to the police saying otherwise were all lying? people whod spent time at his house, in his room, over the new year 6 months or so before and seen it?

Who are these witnesses or is it just a vague ‘they’?

[mrswah]

and those multiple people that gave statements to the police saying otherwise were all lying? people whod spent time at his house, in his room, over the new year 6 months or so before and seen it?

Who were these people? Names? Sources?  Did they give evidence in court?

[mrswah]

Don't you ever stop to wonder why witnesses who have testified under oath are all liars if their testimony fails to agree with your narrative.

There are independent witnesses to the fact that Mitchell owned a parka which was exactly the same as the replacement bought by his mother after Jodi's murder.

At least you have moved on from denial that the log burner was - as witnesses testified - in use the night Jodi was murdered, I suppose that is something.

I heard about a teacher who said that LM had previously owned a parka. Who were the other witnesses?