Author Topic: New DNA tests ordered by the SCCRC  (Read 18687 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Bullseye

Re: New DNA tests ordered by the SCCRC
« Reply #135 on: January 19, 2023, 11:53:00 PM »
SF or the presenter never mentioned LM's dad saying he had a parka -- it was one of the people on the comments section that said it. I know the Youtube comments section is hardly a bastion of truth & integrity, but, Craig Dobbie is on record as saying relatives, friends, acquaintances and school teachers all gave statements saying that LM owned such a jacket pre-murder. Like I said, just because it isn't in the public domain doesn't mean it didn't happen. Furthermore, another girl I spoke to on there said her sister was a witness at court around the same time as KT -- both of whom who testified that LM did have that parka pre-murder and who provided photographic evidence of such to police. Doesn't all of this make you feel uncomfortable, FL? Surely they all can't be attention-seekers or mistaken?

From my understanding I thought there were a few witnesses called to say Luke had a parka before the murder(did not think any were his family members though) If the police had photographs in their possession and provided at court the defence would have copies therefore does that not mean Sandra or Scott would have these? I really think the person saying they have photos has to be lying. They could sell them to the papers and make a fair bit of money I’d think lol. But if I seen a picture proving Luke had a parka before the murder that would be near enough case closed for me and many others. Also if Luke’s dad confirmed in court he had a parka that would definitely have been in the papers at the time, did any relatives give evidence in court on this? Sorry to say I really think you have been fed a pack of lies. Question is why people feel the need to make this rubbish up, if they feel the case was strong enough on the evidence given in court.

Offline faithlilly

Re: New DNA tests ordered by the SCCRC
« Reply #136 on: January 19, 2023, 11:55:49 PM »
From my understanding I thought there were a few witnesses called to say Luke had a parka before the murder(did not think any were his family members though) If the police had photographs in their possession and provided at court the defence would have copies therefore does that not mean Sandra or Scott would have these? I really think the person saying they have photos has to be lying. They could sell them to the papers and make a fair bit of money I’d think lol. But if I seen a picture proving Luke had a parka before the murder that would be near enough case closed for me and many others. Also if Luke’s dad confirmed in court he had a parka that would definitely have been in the papers at the time, did any relatives give evidence in court on this? Sorry to say I really think you have been fed a pack of lies. Question is why people feel the need to make this rubbish up, if they feel the case was strong enough on the evidence given in court.

Nail on the head Bullseye….why?
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?