The questioning of these witnesses by DF also included questioning over the changes in their statements. The newspaper reports verify this, if verification was needed.
Think perhaps clarity is needed is it not - It was LM who found? Jodi, not the dog. That is fact. The dog was not in the woodland.
This was not 'dog walkers' were dogs are roaming free or in the actual same terrain.
These four people were on a path, they were not in the woodland.
The woodland is cut off from the path by a dry stone dyke. Which is some 8-10ft in height for the most part?
LM, and only LM took the notion of looking into the woodland (twice), the first time at a spot where there was some stones missing on top?
The 'Gino' spot, so called due to graffiti? on the wall. Where there is a break, yet Ms Lean claims
The wall is stone built, around 12‟‟ thick, and has no other breaks
'No Smoke'
This is in reference, granted to the search party not seeing through any other breaks, to see what LM was doing. Yet there is no mention of this first account of LM taking the notion to look into this woodland.
The search party had been on this path less than 10mins.
When they reached a part in the wall that had a V in it, LM sought to look, yet again into the woodland.
The contrast in statements was to where LM claimed he was - "not even 20yards past the V"
SK "The dogs head was level with this V"
Once LM had entered the woodland he turned immediately to his left. Witnessed by AW and JaJ.
AW remained at the V with the dog. She did not walk back to it?
SK and JaJ continued to walk - they had barely walked around '10ft' when LM shouted he had found something. "shouted back" They backtracked to the V. (ran) Yet LM was on the other side of this V?
"Careful examination of these statements, however, reveals that crucial aspects of them cannot possibly be true." Luke‟s version of events is that the search party had passed the V in the wall when his dog began pawing at the wall and sniffing the air. He went back to the V, because it was slightly easier to get over the wall at that point, then made his way to where the dog had reacted on the other side of the wall (i.e. he turned left.) Both Janine and Stephen said that they were "shouted back" by Luke. But back from where, exactly? By their own contention, Luke had gone straight to the V. This being "shouted back" suggests that, after Luke had gone over the wall, they had carried on down the path. If that is the case, then they were not at the V to see what Luke did when he got to the other side of the wall. Or, Luke was telling the truth
Of course it is simple and plain to see is it not? That all three (LM,SK and JaJ)
continued to walk down this path at the same time once LM was in the woodland. That upon him commencing this walk to the left, they all, except AW continued down, SK and JaJ on the path, LM in the woods. That they had barely walked around 10ft when LM shouted he had found something. Upon them being "shouted back" LM was at the other side of the V yet again. He may have ran back too of course?
Therefore - what is clear from above and in those first witness statements is that "Luke's version of events" and "Luke telling the truth" were and
had always been in contradiction to that of the other members of this search party.
That none of them had gone passed this V break until 'after' LM entered the woodland.
