Author Topic: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean  (Read 58128 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline faithlilly

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #285 on: April 04, 2021, 01:29:12 PM »
Hidden- out of sight, had not been discovered over the course of this evening. Off the beaten track. Behind this 'large Oak' tree that LM had described. " The "first people" saw with more ease than LM as he guided them to where she lay.

That's better, let's start again. It made absolutely no sense, for the police to have coupled this "with the boyfriend" to anything, there were after all, three policemen involved. That the initial report of LM being out searching on his own, was in fact correct. In that first 30mins of these officers obtaining information, it was only LM, which in turn answers why it was only LM's number the police were given? They were gathering information, not investigating. Taken missing person notes which in turn would start the investigation around a 'missing person' - not a murder.

Let's move to that next short period of approx: 20mins. 

Jodi is discovered, by LM. There are two calls put through to the emergency services. Two receiving operators. The information is passed over that "the boyfriend has found something" "a body". It is easy to see here why the officers "on the ground" thought it was only LM, alone, on Roansdyke path when coupling it with the above information. At this point, rapidly, the beginning of the missing person investigation may have turned a corner. Someone had been found. Just found. The police don't know at this point if it was Jodi, how she died, only that someone had been found. - not a murder investigation.

That next short time period, when the police/emergency services arrive at the path. Stop for one moment here and think. Where are we at this point? - Only at the very "beginning". What is still clear here, is that LM had found something.That he had been over the wall. The correct course of action here, is to take his clothing, samples and statement. At this point for elimination purpose of contamination, not just solely this 'prime suspect' reasoning and blatantly treating him different from the 'others'. - After the police had arrived at the scene, once a police officer had been over the wall, to verify for himself, what had been found, by LM.  The investigation into a murder, has only now begun.

Now let's move into those next couple of hours.
 
Statements at the very beginning, the actual start of this murder investigation, from everyone involved from that first point of Jodi being reported missing. It was those statements, the details, the contrasts that raised red flags to the investigating officers. They knew with certainty and clarity the sequence of events that had occurred. That there had been four people on the path. That both AW and SK had been over the wall. That Jodi had most definitely not left "with her boyfriend". From this point it became increasingly difficult to eliminate LM from the investigation.

Therefore, no - The initial information in the missing persons report did not skew the investigation. The information obtained at the actual beginning of this murder investigation, mainly from the words of LM are what brought suspicion upon him.

I’m simply not getting what point you’re trying to make, sorry. Jodi’s body was not ‘hidden’, was not ‘out of sight’. Both Luke and SK saw it almost immediately they went over the wall. Are you suggesting that the body was moved? From where and why?

And of course being told that Jodi had left ‘with her boyfriend’ skewed the investigation and how could it not have? We can see this from the first actions of the police. Three people had been over the wall yet only one was stripped of their clothes, forensically examined and interviewed within a couple of hours of the body being found. When exactly were the clothes of the others that had been over the wall handed in to the police?

In those first few hours there was nothing surrounding the discovery of the body that singled Luke out for particular attention. JaJ and SK both agreed in their first statements that Luke had been pulled back by the dog and that the dog had been sniffing the air and paying particular attention to the v in the wall. Further JaJ said that she knew Luke had found something bad ‘by the concern in his voice’ and SK claimed that they were all ‘in hysterics’. Yet from the off Luke was singled out for different treatment to the rest. What other reason could there have been but the belief that Jodi left with Luke and now he was denying that he had seen her?
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 Brietta

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #286 on: April 04, 2021, 05:49:48 PM »
The "innocent betrayed" was Jodi Jones and her betrayer was Luke Mitchell.

Snip
Continuing to address Mitchell, the judge told him: "What you did was to subject Jodi to a horrible death and one can only hope it was mercifully quick.

"There must however have been a time before she became unconscious when she knew that you, her boyfriend, whom she held in affection and trust and whom she left joyfully to meet, had turned into a fiend.

"She still had her life ahead of her and you snuffed it out.
She was loved by her family and you have left them bereft.
The horror of what you have done has changed many lives and will last far beyond any sentence I can pass on you."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-334958/Boyfriend-guilty-Jodis-evil-murder.html

Sandra Lean has never desisted from tirelessly continuing to pile on the agony of Jodi's family who had to face the torture of enduring the description of the fate she had endured at the hands of Mitchell whom she trusted.
That much of her 'evidence' supporting Mitchell's case has proved unsustainable at four appeals is no accident when the quality of her allegations is subject to unbiased scrutiny.
"All I'm going to say is that we've conducted a very serious investigation and there's no indication that Madeleine McCann's parents are connected to her disappearance. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence pointing out that Christian killed her," Wolter told the "Friday at 9"....

Offline faithlilly

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #287 on: April 04, 2021, 11:11:00 PM »
The "innocent betrayed" was Jodi Jones and her betrayer was Luke Mitchell.

Snip
Continuing to address Mitchell, the judge told him: "What you did was to subject Jodi to a horrible death and one can only hope it was mercifully quick.

"There must however have been a time before she became unconscious when she knew that you, her boyfriend, whom she held in affection and trust and whom she left joyfully to meet, had turned into a fiend.

"She still had her life ahead of her and you snuffed it out.
She was loved by her family and you have left them bereft.
The horror of what you have done has changed many lives and will last far beyond any sentence I can pass on you."
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-334958/Boyfriend-guilty-Jodis-evil-murder.html

Sandra Lean has never desisted from tirelessly continuing to pile on the agony of Jodi's family who had to face the torture of enduring the description of the fate she had endured at the hands of Mitchell whom she trusted.
That much of her 'evidence' supporting Mitchell's case has proved unsustainable at four appeals is no accident when the quality of her allegations is subject to unbiased scrutiny.

Four appeals? Really? 

Oh dear, back to the drawing board I think Brietta.
« Last Edit: April 04, 2021, 11:19:59 PM by faithlilly »
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: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #288 on: April 06, 2021, 05:42:15 PM »
This is absolutely untrue. A holiday had been planned by Corrine where Kimberley lived which would have meant that Luke saw her. The holiday had been cancelled. Luke was intending to have a birthday sleepover at a friend’s house with Jodi on the weekend the prosecution said that Luke would have seen Kimberly.

The prosecution or Kimberly Thompson?

And what did she tell the jury?
« Last Edit: April 06, 2021, 06:05:52 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #289 on: April 06, 2021, 05:57:15 PM »
This is absolutely untrue. A holiday had been planned by Corrine where Kimberley lived which would have meant that Luke saw her. The holiday had been cancelled. Luke was intending to have a birthday sleepover at a friend’s house with Jodi on the weekend the prosecution said that Luke would have seen Kimberly.

18) he had lied to the police about the last time he had contacted Kimberley Thomson, whom he was due to meet shortly after the murder, and had not told the deceased about her (a possible source of conflict between him and the deceased);
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

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

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #291 on: April 09, 2021, 12:46:45 PM »
Has anyone read this book? 

3rd September 2003 (BBC news)
In a service at Gorebridge Parish Church, in Midlothian, the 14-year-old was remembered in spoken tributes, through music and by mourners who wore sunflower emblems, symbolising a precious life

Senior detectives including Detective Inspector Tom Martin and Detective Superintendent Craig Dobbie also attended. They too were wearing the sunflower emblem

Jodi's family had asked well-wishers to plant a sunflower in her memory instead of sending flowers
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3202419.stm

What are members/posters thoughts on the picture on the front cover of Sandra Lean’s book?

« Last Edit: April 09, 2021, 12:51:14 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline WakeyWakey

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #292 on: April 09, 2021, 04:47:08 PM »
Innocents Betrayed Ltd

https://suite.endole.co.uk/insight/company/13091576-innocents-betrayed-ltd

wonder if theyll still be around in 2 years time whent the corp tax is due  @)(++(*

Offline WakeyWakey

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #293 on: April 09, 2021, 04:52:36 PM »
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3202419.stm

What are members/posters thoughts on the picture on the front cover of Sandra Lean’s book?

at best its a disrespectful appropriation of somethign that had come to have great personal meaning to the friends and family of the victim

noticed the sunflower was heavily used in the "sgiath films" intro as well on youtube. seems the entire content of that film was directed by sandra, and it remains their only content on youtube, and the only trace of "sgiath films" available online anywhere. - just who is "sgiath films"?


Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #294 on: April 15, 2021, 06:42:53 PM »
This re Allan Jamieson from 1996 who was also involved in the TV show

Sentencing Jamieson, of Gleneagles Avenue, Cumbernauld, Sheriff Iain Simpson, said:

“What this amounts to fundamentally is bullying a lady on the road.

“If we all stopped people on the motorway whose driving we didn't like, then straddled along the hard shoulder would be a queue of people arguing with each other.''

Last night, Mrs Doyle, 34, said: ``I went through hell because of this. The whole experience was shattering. I had to see a psychiatrist and was later put on medication by my GP.''


https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12049924.woman-terrified-by-drivers-action-police-suspend-forensic-scientist/

Allan Jamieson features in a recent podcast with Tiernan Coyle - fibre expert in Simon Hall case - https://www.forensicfibreexpert.com/?p=167
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #295 on: April 15, 2021, 06:55:04 PM »
Sandra Lean made claim in October 2019 she had withdrawn her book ‘No Smoke’ from the publishers (Stephen T Manning/Checkpoint press)

However in a recent podcast with Sharon Sunshine (Liquid Sunshine Crime on YouTube) where ‘No Smoke’ appeared to be again being promoted - she made claim she hasn’t been able to get in touch with the publisher?

Anyone have any idea what’s true and what’s not regarding ‘No Smoke’?

Does Stephen T Manning have links to the travelling community also?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #296 on: April 15, 2021, 07:08:06 PM »
Does Stephen T Manning have links to the travelling community also?

And did Corrine Mitchell make initial contact with Sandra Lean via the travelling community network?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Holly Goodhead

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #297 on: April 19, 2021, 11:55:07 AM »
Has anyone read this book? 

Whatever you might or might not  think about Sandra, the book gives a lot of detail, and I would recommend it.

I would be very interested to read a book by someone who believes Luke is guilty, but , as far as I'm aware, nobody has written one!

Is this book dedicated to LM's case?  Is it the only book to cover the case?
Just my opinion of course but Jeremy Bamber is innocent and a couple from UK, unknown to T9, abducted Madeleine McCann - motive unknown.  Was J J murdered as a result of identifying as a goth?

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2158
  • Total likes: 791
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #298 on: April 19, 2021, 01:01:48 PM »
Is this book dedicated to LM's case?  Is it the only book to cover the case?

Yes, it covers just LM's case.  I haven't managed to find another book that covers the case.

I think the book is well researched and very informative, although I realise others don't agree.

Sandra Lean's "No Smoke", written some years before, covers LM's case plus others, and so is not anything like as detailed.

Offline mrswah

  • Senior Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2158
  • Total likes: 791
  • Thinking outside the box, as usual-------
Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #299 on: April 19, 2021, 01:03:53 PM »
And did Corrine Mitchell make initial contact with Sandra Lean via the travelling community network?


According to SL, she didn't know CM at all until the latter heard that she had doubts about Luke being guilty of Jodi's murder, and contacted her in the hope that she could help her.