Author Topic: LM & Jodiís texts between 1634-1638 & LMís call to the Speaking Clock at 1654.  (Read 1228 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mr Apples

Nothing strange about it - other than the reason the data was deleted by LM, for it held incriminating evidence.

Like, for example, a text indicating an arranged meet between Luke and Jodi in Easthouses at that crucial timeframe between 1638 - 1720? Texts to his friends (eg, David High) urging them to meet him? Or even texts to his mother between 1730 and 1800 asking for her help as something terrible had happened (though I think Luke was too smart to send a message of this nature, even if he was in a state of panic or confusion)? Regardless, wouldnít the police have been able to retrieve all of Lukeís text messages between 2003 and 2004, from the operator/carrier he was using at the time? As for the phone logs, I canít see any significance attached to the outgoing/incoming phone register being deleted by Luke between 0031-0039 on 01.07.03 (Mr Morrisís testimony), especially as the police were with him then. Am I missing something? I once stumbled upon a forum that mentioned that Luke had tried to create an alibi by using his phone, but the poster couldnít remember what it was. Interesting. Any takers?

Btw, Parky41, you seem quite knowledgeable about this case . . . were you involved in it in some capacity? Or just been following it closely since it happened, as an armchair detective?

Offline Mr Apples

Actually, why didnít the police endeavour to retrieve those text exchanges between Luke and Jodi at 1634-1638? Even back then, in 2003, mobile phone operators retained this info for a year; Luke was arrested & charged on 14.04.04, so they still had at least 10 weeks to procure this info ó info that wouldíve severely bolstered the prosecutionís case.

Also surprising is the fact that police never found any incriminating dna on Lukeís phone; it wouldíve been a very tricky task to rid those chunky Ď03 phones of all blood traces, in the deep crevices of the buttons and such, would it not? And, of course, blood would inevitably have seeped through to the phoneís innards, into the electronic hardware? Police wouldíve surely dismantled the phone and forensically analysed it extensively for traces of blood? Strange that no incriminating dna was found, donít you think? Unless, of course, Luke had 2 mobile phones? Used the same SIM card in a different phone after the murder? Regardless, Iím surprised the police never extensively investigated his phone usage between 30.06.03 - 01.07.03, as it couldíve yielded more crucial circumstantial evidence for the prosecutionís case. Strange.

Offline faithlilly

Actually, why didnít the police endeavour to retrieve those text exchanges between Luke and Jodi at 1634-1638? Even back then, in 2003, mobile phone operators retained this info for a year; Luke was arrested & charged on 14.04.04, so they still had at least 10 weeks to procure this info ó info that wouldíve severely bolstered the prosecutionís case.

Also surprising is the fact that police never found any incriminating dna on Lukeís phone; it wouldíve been a very tricky task to rid those chunky Ď03 phones of all blood traces, in the deep crevices of the buttons and such, would it not? And, of course, blood would inevitably have seeped through to the phoneís innards, into the electronic hardware? Police wouldíve surely dismantled the phone and forensically analysed it extensively for traces of blood? Strange that no incriminating dna was found, donít you think? Unless, of course, Luke had 2 mobile phones? Used the same SIM card in a different phone after the murder? Regardless, Iím surprised the police never extensively investigated his phone usage between 30.06.03 - 01.07.03, as it couldíve yielded more crucial circumstantial evidence for the prosecutionís case. Strange.

Iíve made the very same points myself Mr Apples.


Offline rulesapply

Actually, why didnít the police endeavour to retrieve those text exchanges between Luke and Jodi at 1634-1638? Even back then, in 2003, mobile phone operators retained this info for a year; Luke was arrested & charged on 14.04.04, so they still had at least 10 weeks to procure this info ó info that wouldíve severely bolstered the prosecutionís case.

Also surprising is the fact that police never found any incriminating dna on Lukeís phone; it wouldíve been a very tricky task to rid those chunky Ď03 phones of all blood traces, in the deep crevices of the buttons and such, would it not? And, of course, blood would inevitably have seeped through to the phoneís innards, into the electronic hardware? Police wouldíve surely dismantled the phone and forensically analysed it extensively for traces of blood? Strange that no incriminating dna was found, donít you think? Unless, of course, Luke had 2 mobile phones? Used the same SIM card in a different phone after the murder? Regardless, Iím surprised the police never extensively investigated his phone usage between 30.06.03 - 01.07.03, as it couldíve yielded more crucial circumstantial evidence for the prosecutionís case. Strange.

I believe the police did everything in their power to retrieve all information. I believe the reason they couldn't was because everything was deliberately destroyed

Offline Bullseye

I believe the police did everything in their power to retrieve all information. I believe the reason they couldn't was because everything was deliberately destroyed

What makes you believe the police did all they could?

How do you mean everything was deliberately destroyed, can you elaborate? What was destroyed, by whom? How did this stop police getting the messages?

I think the messages might have been deleted from both Lukeís phone and Jodiís mums phone (Jodi put her sim in her mums phone to send Luke the messages that afternoon I believe so understand why she would delete this) from what I understand Luke does not remember deleting the messages, also read some stuff was deleted while Luke was in custody so could not be Luke, but why could the police not get the message from the phone service provider is what I donít understand? Iím sure these messages would shed so much light on the case. Meet you at 5.30 at end of street after tea, or meet you at top of path soon as possible. Or maybe so much more, we will never know

Offline Bullseye

I remember reading an article years ago that said some messages were recovered.


Found this that shows some messages were retrieved from the Sim but nothing to say why others had not been, like the ones between Jodi and Luke. I guess the techniques back then were all new, they got what they could.

But if there was a way to somehow not just delete but to remove messages from the sim also back then, that would be interesting.  I canít remember, anyone else?

From article

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12406880.phone-record-of-jodi-murder-accused-wiped/


Mr Morris also described how he had carried out more sophisticated tests on the phone's SIM card to try to recover deleted messages.

Both the inbox and outbox were empty, but the SIM card revealed a message received on the evening of Friday, June 27, 2003, saying: "Luke its Kim im at ma grans can u phone mi on (number) Love u xKimx" Another message on the SIM card at 10.41pm from Jodi's mother read: "2 wks grounding toad . . . Say bye 2 luke".

In questioning, Mr Findlay and Mr Morris agreed that text messages on Jodi's mother's mobile had also been deleted and there was nothing unusual about people doing that.

Offline rulesapply

What makes you believe the police did all they could?

How do you mean everything was deliberately destroyed, can you elaborate? What was destroyed, by whom? How did this stop police getting the messages?

I think the messages might have been deleted from both Lukeís phone and Jodiís mums phone (Jodi put her sim in her mums phone to send Luke the messages that afternoon I believe so understand why she would delete this) from what I understand Luke does not remember deleting the messages, also read some stuff was deleted while Luke was in custody so could not be Luke, but why could the police not get the message from the phone service provider is what I donít understand? Iím sure these messages would shed so much light on the case. Meet you at 5.30 at end of street after tea, or meet you at top of path soon as possible. Or maybe so much more, we will never know

Because they were investigating the murder of a child.

Offline Bullseye

Because they were investigating the murder of a child.

And thatís your answer? They were investigating the murder of a young child so they should have done all they could but going by what has been said about the handling of the crime scene itís clear they didnít do everything they could, so makes you wonder what else they could have done. I donít know anything about what info the police could or could not have got at the time, it appears they received some message from lukes sim but not others. I wonder if the mobile phone company were contacted and if they were able to provide information back in 2003? But you said about stuff bring deliberately destroyed, can you clarify what you mean, by whom? Are you saying Luke somehow destroyed the messages between him and Jodi? They still should have got info from Jodiís sim, that couldnít have been deliberately destroyed or are you saying that was too?

Offline rulesapply

And thatís your answer? They were investigating the murder of a young child so they should have done all they could but going by what has been said about the handling of the crime scene itís clear they didnít do everything they could, so makes you wonder what else they could have done. I donít know anything about what info the police could or could not have got at the time, it appears they received some message from lukes sim but not others. I wonder if the mobile phone company were contacted and if they were able to provide information back in 2003? But you said about stuff bring deliberately destroyed, can you clarify what you mean, by whom? Are you saying Luke somehow destroyed the messages between him and Jodi? They still should have got info from Jodiís sim, that couldnít have been deliberately destroyed or are you saying that was too?

Yes, that's my answer. I don't have anything lengthy to write. I believe the police would have investigated as thoroughly as they could have given that a child had been murdered and mutilated. I have no idea why a tent wasn't erected immediately at the crime scene but iIF mistakes were made there, I still don't have reason to believe everything else they did was a mistake too. If the messages on Luke's phone were deleted then they could have been destroyed and most of them were. They were deliberately destroyed. No mystery there I don't think.

Offline Mr Apples

Just quickly chiming back in to this thread because I think I may have overlooked something previously. In an old Herald article (provided at the bottom), it was mentioned that the police had contacted Lukeís mobile phone operator (no exact date was mentioned when they contacted the operator) and as a result of this were able to ascertain that he had made a call to his mother at 0031 on 01.07.03 from his mobile phone. He had also made a call to his mother at 0039 that same morning, which the police said was the only call that was registered in Lukeís call logs when they first checked his phone on the morning of 01.07.03 at DPS. So, putting these two pieces of information together, the police concluded that LM had deleted his calls log between those two times, because the last 10 calls were missing when they checked his phone on 01.07.03. So what? Given that they (Derek Morris) had contacted LMís mobile phone operator (presumably on 01.07.03 as well), why didnít they reveal which numbers were deleted? Why did they only mention the one call that had been deleted? The phone operator surely had this info? Or was it a case of there were no other calls that the police thought were incriminating enough? Or perhaps Luke had made a string of phone calls late that night/early that morning but they never connected and thatís why the operator couldnít retrieve the info? Luke got lucky? I donít get it. Besides, LM was in police custody when those 2 calls were made early that morning? What masterplan could he devise from there? Unless, the policeís view was that LM was panicking because he was guilty and owed to this guilt he decided to delete everything Ďjust to be safeí? Who knows.  Also, while the police were liaising with the phone company, why didnít they ask them to retrieve all of LMís text messages for 30.06.03 & 01.07.03? Surely those wouldíve contained more incriminating evidence, wether they knew it at the time or not? Anyone got any ideas? Iím confused slightly by the policeís tactics here.

Also, can someone remind me .... how did the police ascertain that Jodi had texted Luke on 30.06.03 between 1634-1638? Who gave that evidence? Was it Luke himself? Backed up by Judith? My memoryís a bit fuzzy on this.

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12406880.phone-record-of-jodi-murder-accused-wiped/