Author Topic: Two Mothers.  (Read 2271 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline faithlilly

Two Mothers.
« on: January 16, 2023, 01:01:53 AM »
At Luke’s trial his mother’s presence at a tattoo parlour, where it was alleged that she lied about Luke’s age, was used to great effect to damage her credibility.

Jodi’s mother called her son’s mental health doctor on the day of Jodi’s murder and cancelled his scheduled home visit, claiming in her statement that she had used ‘the usual excuse’, so her son could smoke cannabis.

Could someone please explain to me why one falsehood undermined the veracity of one mother’s testimony whilst another, arguably more serious falsehood, did not impact the other’s? Wasn’t this simply rampant hypocrisy?
« Last Edit: January 16, 2023, 01:09:40 AM 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 Mr Apples

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #1 on: January 31, 2023, 07:57:57 PM »
The simple answer is: JOSJ wasn't tried in court. He wasn't tried in court because there was no evidence pointing towards him as being the killer. It's a myth he wasn't thoroughly checked out and eliminated. The tattoo parlour evidence was apposite as it showed that CM was willing to lie for her son by means of using a false ID so he could get a tattoo (he was underage); CM, by her own actions, was clearly being dishonest and deceitful. Dishonest and deceitful so that, once again, LM got his own way. A spoiled and mollycoddled teenager treated as an adult, given free rein to do as he pleased; combine this with his underlying mental health issues at the time -- issues which teachers tried to highlight and address in both primary school & high school -- and you have a potentially very bad combination. (Also, on a more sinister note, CM allowing her son to get the tattoo could be construed as them having thought they'd gotten away with the it, as CM told the shop assistant (in October 2003) that the tattoo "was a celebration of sorts after going through a particularly hard time".) Of course they were going to use it as evidence in such a long and complex case. Why wouldn't they? And that evidence was allowed and led by the Crown to highlight CM's dishonesty and deceit. If she was capable of lies and deceit in October 2003, then she was most probably capable of it from June '03 and onwards. The crown succesfully made their point -- and that point, although not one of the main planks of evidence, was part of that mountain of circumstantial evidence used against LM at trial.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #2 on: January 31, 2023, 08:33:14 PM »
The simple answer is: JOSJ wasn't tried in court. He wasn't tried in court because there was no evidence pointing towards him as being the killer. It's a myth he wasn't thoroughly checked out and eliminated. The tattoo parlour evidence was apposite as it showed that CM was willing to lie for her son by means of using a false ID so he could get a tattoo (he was underage); CM, by her own actions, was clearly being dishonest and deceitful. Dishonest and deceitful so that, once again, LM got his own way. A spoiled and mollycoddled teenager treated as an adult, given free rein to do as he pleased; combine this with his underlying mental health issues at the time -- issues which teachers tried to highlight and address in both primary school & high school -- and you have a potentially very bad combination. (Also, on a more sinister note, CM allowing her son to get the tattoo could be construed as them having thought they'd gotten away with the it, as CM told the shop assistant (in October 2003) that the tattoo "was a celebration of sorts after going through a particularly hard time".) Of course they were going to use it as evidence in such a long and complex case. Why wouldn't they? And that evidence was allowed and led by the Crown to highlight CM's dishonesty and deceit. If she was capable of lies and deceit in October 2003, then she was most probably capable of it from June '03 and onwards. The crown succesfully made their point -- and that point, although not one of the main planks of evidence, was part of that mountain of circumstantial evidence used against LM at trial.

But by your reasoning then JuJ was also capable of dishonesty and deceit as she also lied for her son, and arguably in more serious circumstances. If JuJ’s son was eliminated it was, in the main, because his mum alibied him. How can that alibi possibly be believed if JuJ, by her own words, has a history of lying for her son ( ‘the usual excuse’)? Further the alibi JuJ gave for her son is further undermined by several other witness’s testimony. Couple this with an eyewitness who saw Stocky Man following Jodi and identified him as JuJ’s son and you have a case every bit as strong as that presented against Luke.

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 Parky41

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #3 on: January 31, 2023, 09:26:00 PM »
And again, we are back to the point - You are putting out what was far from the reality of the evidence, this simple application of lying about age, it had absolutely nothing to do with lying about his age, nor of him getting any tattoo!

That false narrative on repeat - The evidence. CM was asked about using false ID and she denied this, she lied that this had happened. She said none had been asked for, only his age. To, what if I told you the mans name, and again it was no, the man was in his 50's. Missing the whole point, this of course after DF had a fit of producing evidence from the staff.

Of the book, that ID given of a man, a family friend, of altered ID to have a date of birth of a younger person. To show the court how easily the woman would lie under oath to protect her son. That there was no way that the staff made that name up, they did not know the Mitchells nor the name of their friend.

So, not even a good try, bar those who soak any old nonsense up of course. It had nothing to do with allowing her son a tattoo, trivial, nor indeed of using fake ID, it was only around lying under oath, of denying that they had produced this fake ID under the name of a family friend - Caught red handed!

As we had with the knife, shall we have that again? In that station and asked about the new knife that had been purchased, the police wanted to know where it was, no idea was the claim, could not remember any knife or where it was. For it was not in the house whilst being searched. Leaving the station, discussion with lawyer and so forth, one again had the most amazing memory recall, they located the knife from its hiding place (perhaps it was with the other one, who knows?) and gave it to Beaumont.

To evidence, the search team, the pictures taken of that search. No bag with any knife in it, as she tried to claim, that they had missed it, nope not true, evidence already heard. Of her having no idea of any knife nor of where it was. To miraculously locate it and claim it had been hidden for camping in winter.

To SM and being told that he had of course told the truth, caught red handed again, of turning ones face away and told about a "petulant child" the actions of one when being found out repeatedly! to not being truthful, of caught doing wrong.

So, this false narrative by manipulators and liars, who do this across the board, where Lean, to those a little lacking, attempts to apply that the new knife had the police attempt to place it as the murder weapon, again that deception - The only knife placed as missing and still missing is a Brown handled Skunting knife.

To Jodi's mother, the other half of this "Two Mothers" and again, manipulators and liars who put out a false narrative, attempt many illogical points that have no bearing in the slightest about testimony under oath. Lean tells us from statements of some cancelled appointment, which was told to the police as it is in the statements. Which again shows honesty and not deception. That whilst one had cancelled an appointment (not interested in those who lie and manipulate at will) without showing from statements what reason was given to the doctor. Where it would appear that the doctor via the son and/or mother made it clear to them of any cannabis use.

That in a murder investigation the family told truth and not lies to the police, of that cancelled appointment, of the cannabis use - And this has what bearing exactly upon lying under oath? I do wonder at points if you actually realise what you are saying? You are highlighting repeatedly honesty to the police in a murder investigation from Jodi's family.

Yet over ride every lie told to the police by the Mitchells? Along with lying under oath, and again putting out a false narrative around what the actual evidence was about? 




Offline faithlilly

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #4 on: January 31, 2023, 11:11:15 PM »
And again, we are back to the point - You are putting out what was far from the reality of the evidence, this simple application of lying about age, it had absolutely nothing to do with lying about his age, nor of him getting any tattoo!

That false narrative on repeat - The evidence. CM was asked about using false ID and she denied this, she lied that this had happened. She said none had been asked for, only his age. To, what if I told you the mans name, and again it was no, the man was in his 50's. Missing the whole point, this of course after DF had a fit of producing evidence from the staff.

Of the book, that ID given of a man, a family friend, of altered ID to have a date of birth of a younger person. To show the court how easily the woman would lie under oath to protect her son. That there was no way that the staff made that name up, they did not know the Mitchells nor the name of their friend.

So, not even a good try, bar those who soak any old nonsense up of course. It had nothing to do with allowing her son a tattoo, trivial, nor indeed of using fake ID, it was only around lying under oath, of denying that they had produced this fake ID under the name of a family friend - Caught red handed!

As we had with the knife, shall we have that again? In that station and asked about the new knife that had been purchased, the police wanted to know where it was, no idea was the claim, could not remember any knife or where it was. For it was not in the house whilst being searched. Leaving the station, discussion with lawyer and so forth, one again had the most amazing memory recall, they located the knife from its hiding place (perhaps it was with the other one, who knows?) and gave it to Beaumont.

To evidence, the search team, the pictures taken of that search. No bag with any knife in it, as she tried to claim, that they had missed it, nope not true, evidence already heard. Of her having no idea of any knife nor of where it was. To miraculously locate it and claim it had been hidden for camping in winter.

To SM and being told that he had of course told the truth, caught red handed again, of turning ones face away and told about a "petulant child" the actions of one when being found out repeatedly! to not being truthful, of caught doing wrong.

So, this false narrative by manipulators and liars, who do this across the board, where Lean, to those a little lacking, attempts to apply that the new knife had the police attempt to place it as the murder weapon, again that deception - The only knife placed as missing and still missing is a Brown handled Skunting knife.

To Jodi's mother, the other half of this "Two Mothers" and again, manipulators and liars who put out a false narrative, attempt many illogical points that have no bearing in the slightest about testimony under oath. Lean tells us from statements of some cancelled appointment, which was told to the police as it is in the statements. Which again shows honesty and not deception. That whilst one had cancelled an appointment (not interested in those who lie and manipulate at will) without showing from statements what reason was given to the doctor. Where it would appear that the doctor via the son and/or mother made it clear to them of any cannabis use.

That in a murder investigation the family told truth and not lies to the police, of that cancelled appointment, of the cannabis use - And this has what bearing exactly upon lying under oath? I do wonder at points if you actually realise what you are saying? You are highlighting repeatedly honesty to the police in a murder investigation from Jodi's family.

Yet over ride every lie told to the police by the Mitchells? Along with lying under oath, and again putting out a false narrative around what the actual evidence was about?

Was the photographic ID allegedly given to the tattoo parlour ever produced in court or was that simply more lies? Don’t guidelines state that all tattoo parlours must keep photocopies of all documents that are given to then as proof of age? If they had then they would have been able to produce them in court. Was the tattoo parlour ever asked why they accepted the photo ID of a 45 year old man from a 15 year old boy? Surely that would have been a red flag?

Let’s look at the lies cited dispassionately. JuJ told the police that she had used the ‘usual excuse’ to the mental health team when cancelling her son’s appointment. This appears to suggest a pattern of behaviour where dishonesty wasn’t seen as a big deal…where the ends justified the means. Of course we all tell small lies at times…human interactions often demand it…but this wasn’t a lie without consequence and JuJ knew what those consequences were…boy, hadn’t she experienced them in May. Maybe that was the point…she couldn’t refuse.

Of course JuJ knew that the police would find out about the missed appointment and her son’s mental illness, eventually, so she really had no option but to come clean. To claim this forced openness was somehow virtuous is ridiculous…it wasn’t….it was necessary.

Of course the prosecution’s, and by association, JuJ’s ‘honesty’ was never going to be fully embraced. How could it be when while they were trying to paint a young child as a psychotic killer, psychosis controlled the victim’s very family.
« Last Edit: February 01, 2023, 12:05:46 AM 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 Venturi Swirl

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #5 on: January 31, 2023, 11:22:01 PM »
Luke Mitchell was “a young child” when he was arrested for this crime was he?  A young child who had sexual relationships, smoked dope and threatened people with knives?  It’s not the description I would give him.  Madeleine McCann was a young child, Luke Mitchell was a teenager, and a fairly delinquent one it would seem.
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Mr Apples

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #6 on: February 04, 2023, 12:08:15 PM »
But by your reasoning then JuJ was also capable of dishonesty and deceit as she also lied for her son, and arguably in more serious circumstances. If JuJ’s son was eliminated it was, in the main, because his mum alibied him. How can that alibi possibly be believed if JuJ, by her own words, has a history of lying for her son ( ‘the usual excuse’)? Further the alibi JuJ gave for her son is further undermined by several other witness’s testimony. Couple this with an eyewitness who saw Stocky Man following Jodi and identified him as JuJ’s son and you have a case every bit as strong as that presented against Luke.

Haven't really thought too much about the stocky man evidence (think I need to re-read SL's IB). As per a news report on 16.07.03, 2 independent witnesses came forward, 1 male and 1 female (and one of them supposedly knew Jodi personally), to say they'd seen a stocky man following (walking behind) Jodi on the Easthouses Road just after 1700 hrs on 30.06.03. Another news report, on 19.07.03, indicated that a male witness said he thought he saw the same stocky man again, on 07.07.03, when the police did the reconstruction of Jodi's last movements for news broadcasts -- but it turned out this guy (who the male witness thought to be stocky man and spotted in the reconstruction) was out of the country on the 30.06.03 (he came forward and it was proven he was in England at the time). So, it would have been interesting to see how much this guy resembled JOSJ and when the male witness gave his statements to police. More interestingly, the female witness came forward again, some 10 weeks after her first statement, to say she had seen stocky man again, and could show police exactly who he was (from a group of people who were strangers to her). Turns out it was JOSJ. Very interesting, though I'd like to see when and where she saw her evidence that featured JOSJ with a bunch of people who she didn't know, and like to know on which date she gave her first statement to police regarding this her sighting of stocky man with a grey hoodie and backpack following (or walking behind) Jodi on Easthouses Road just after 1700 on 30.06.03., especially if she was the one who knew Jodi personally. Can anyone shed some light?

Offline Mr Apples

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #7 on: February 04, 2023, 12:49:19 PM »
Parky -- I didn't know CM denied under oath that Luke presented the fake id to the staff at the parlour (did he put his own photo on Mr Tyler's original id? Or was it a replica of Mr Tyler's original id with Luke's photo on it? Must have been one of those 2 possibilities, as I can't see a 45-year-old man's face passing a 15-year-old's, nor, by a remarkable coincidence, resembling Luke in any way).

Incidentally, I think you are completely wrong that CM going with Luke to get the tattoo had sod all to do with it. It was everything to do with it, imo. She was willing to lie that he was 18, in order that he could get that tattoo. She told a bare-faced lie to the staff that he was 18 (citeable and in public domain). It's certainly not the biggest of transgressions, but a lot of parents, on principle, wouldn't tell a bare-faced lie like that. Certainly, if she did deny under oath that he produced the fake id, that would be more the more damning evidence as it would, as you say, highlight that she would lie under oath (though, it is possible she didn't know about the fake photographic id, but I doubt it). But, like I said, I don't think her lies of telling staff that he was over 18 should be downplayed. Does anyone know how the tattoo evidence came into being? Did the police contact them initially or vice versa?

Offline faithlilly

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #8 on: February 04, 2023, 03:42:24 PM »
Parky -- I didn't know CM denied under oath that Luke presented the fake id to the staff at the parlour (did he put his own photo on Mr Tyler's original id? Or was it a replica of Mr Tyler's original id with Luke's photo on it? Must have been one of those 2 possibilities, as I can't see a 45-year-old man's face passing a 15-year-old's, nor, by a remarkable coincidence, resembling Luke in any way).

Incidentally, I think you are completely wrong that CM going with Luke to get the tattoo had sod all to do with it. It was everything to do with it, imo. She was willing to lie that he was 18, in order that he could get that tattoo. She told a bare-faced lie to the staff that he was 18 (citeable and in public domain). It's certainly not the biggest of transgressions, but a lot of parents, on principle, wouldn't tell a bare-faced lie like that. Certainly, if she did deny under oath that he produced the fake id, that would be more the more damning evidence as it would, as you say, highlight that she would lie under oath (though, it is possible she didn't know about the fake photographic id, but I doubt it). But, like I said, I don't think her lies of telling staff that he was over 18 should be downplayed. Does anyone know how the tattoo evidence came into being? Did the police contact them initially or vice versa?

Can I ask Mr Apples what you think of a mother who tells a bare-faced lie to a mental health team, not once but it appears, several times ( the usual excuse), who are trying to prevent your son having a psychotic episode? A mother who has been the victim of her son’s psychotic rage. A mother who by that very lie is enabling her son to indulge in the use of the drug which causes him the psychosis and paranoia in the first place.

What do you think of a mother who does that?

More importantly if the information about JuJ son’s mental health record had been before the jury as well as the the phone call and her enablement of her son’s drug use, what do you think they’d judge more harshly, the lie to allow a son to acquire a tattoo or the lie to allow a son to smoke the drug which she knows causes violent psychosis and paranoia in him?
« Last Edit: February 04, 2023, 05:02:42 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 Mr Apples

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #9 on: February 04, 2023, 07:17:49 PM »
Can I ask Mr Apples what you think of a mother who tells a bare-faced lie to a mental health team, not once but it appears, several times ( the usual excuse), who are trying to prevent your son having a psychotic episode? A mother who has been the victim of her son’s psychotic rage. A mother who by that very lie is enabling her son to indulge in the use of the drug which causes him the psychosis and paranoia in the first place.

What do you think of a mother who does that?

More importantly if the information about JuJ son’s mental health record had been before the jury as well as the the phone call and her enablement of her son’s drug use, what do you think they’d judge more harshly, the lie to allow a son to acquire a tattoo or the lie to allow a son to smoke the drug which she knows causes violent psychosis and paranoia in him?

Well, like I said, JOSJ wasn't the one being tried in court for murder. And certainly not the person with 20 points of circumstantial evidence being used against them. 20 points is a lot for one person, most would agree.

Offline faithlilly

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #10 on: February 04, 2023, 09:55:55 PM »
Well, like I said, JOSJ wasn't the one being tried in court for murder. And certainly not the person with 20 points of circumstantial evidence being used against them. 20 points is a lot for one person, most would agree.

With respect I asked what you thought?

If the jury had known that the individual who was identified as stocky man’s mother had lied to his mental health team more than once in order for him to smoke cannabis and that that cannabis brought on psychosis and paranoia do you think that they would

A) Trust her evidence
B) Cause reasonable doubt.

« Last Edit: February 04, 2023, 10:22:54 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 Venturi Swirl

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #11 on: February 04, 2023, 10:29:01 PM »
Isn’t there one salient difference between these two mothers’ lies?  One of them admitted telling a lie in her statement, the other has never admitted telling a lie as far as I’m aware?
"Surely the fact that their accounts were different reinforces their veracity rather than diminishes it? If they had colluded in protecting ........ surely all of their accounts would be the same?" - Faithlilly

Offline Mr Apples

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #12 on: February 04, 2023, 10:55:45 PM »
With respect I asked what you thought?

If the jury had known that the individual who was identified as stocky man’s mother had lied to his mental health team more than once in order for him to smoke cannabis and that that cannabis brought on psychosis and paranoia do you think that they would

A) Trust her evidence
B) Cause reasonable doubt.

FL, you are evidently not a stupid person, but, these are stupid questions that are literally impossible to answer. Do you honestly think the Joneses would be capable of covering up for JOSJ and lying for him in order that someone else would take the blame for such a horrific and savage murder? Moreover, you don't think L&B police would've been able to suss out that JOSJ had done it if he had?

Btw, I am interested to know who this female witness was who supposedly identified JOSJ following Jodi on Easthouses Rd on 30.06.03 just after 1700 hrs and then again 10 weeks later amongst a group of people who were strangers to her. Can you assist me here?

Offline faithlilly

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #13 on: February 04, 2023, 11:27:53 PM »
FL, you are evidently not a stupid person, but, these are stupid questions that are literally impossible to answer. Do you honestly think the Joneses would be capable of covering up for JOSJ and lying for him in order that someone else would take the blame for such a horrific and savage murder? Moreover, you don't think L&B police would've been able to suss out that JOSJ had done it if he had?

Btw, I am interested to know who this female witness was who supposedly identified JOSJ following Jodi on Easthouses Rd on 30.06.03 just after 1700 hrs and then again 10 weeks later amongst a group of people who were strangers to her. Can you assist me here?

I think they are perfectly reasonable questions which you appear unwilling to answer. Would you believe a woman who had lied as proficiently as JuJ for her son? Further you believe that Corrine Mitchell was capable of covering up for Luke it appears because she lied about his age in order that he could be tattooed. Explain to me the difference?


The Joness seem to have gained credibility by dint of being the victim’s family yet even a cursory look at their statements on the night of Jodi’s murder raise many, as yet, unanswered questions.
« Last Edit: February 04, 2023, 11:53:43 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 Mr Apples

Re: Two Mothers.
« Reply #14 on: February 04, 2023, 11:55:36 PM »
I think they are perfectly reasonable questions which you appear unwilling to answer. Would you believe a woman who had lied as proficiently as JuJ for her son? Further you believe that Corrine Mitchell was capable of covering up for Luke it appears because she lied about his age in order that he could be tattooed. Explain to me the difference?

Proficiently?? Hyperbolic, is it not? Are you on the naughty stuff tonight? So, provide examples of Judith's many lies outwith her lies to Josj's mental health team so he could smoke cannabis? I think Judith would've known if her son was a potential killer, so it's no biggie her lying about her son not being able to attend appointments with his mental health team. Btw, did Josj have a criminal history in 2003?