UK Justice Forum 🇬🇧
Alleged Miscarriages of Justice => Luke Mitchell and the murder of his teenage girfriend Jodi Jones on 30 June 2003. => Topic started by: Admin on March 04, 2021, 05:09:32 PM
-
Having taken legal advice on this, it appears that Sandra Lean is seeking public donations on the GoFundMe website on the basis of at least one false premise.
She claims in her introduction that, "Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong. Although she has now been housed, this fundraiser is aimed at helping get Corinne back on her feet".
How exactly has the justice system gone wrong? Surely this claim is just that, a claim, an opinion, it is certainly not an established fact.
Luke Mitchell has been tried and convicted according to the laws of Scotland, he has had several appeals all of which have failed. He has also had the benefit of a more recent further Application to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission supported by one of Scotland's top QCs who just happens to now be a High Court Judge. This again failed to get any traction so the claim that Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong is in fact untrue and false according to Law.
On the 21st January 2005, Corinne Mitchell's younger son Luke Mitchell was convicted of the murder of his then 'girlfriend' Jodi Jones, and sentenced to a minimum of 20-years in prison.
The charge...
"...on 30 June 2003 at a wooded area near Roan's Dyke between Easthouses Road, Easthouses and Newbattle Road, both Dalkeith, Midlothian, you did assault Jodi Catherine Jones ... and did repeatedly strike her on the head and body, compress and constrict her neck and restrict her breathing, cause her to fall to the ground, apply a ligature around her arms, repeatedly strike her on the head, mouth and body with a knife or other similar instrument and you did murder her and further you did strike her head and body with a knife or similar instrument and in particular her face, ear, mouth, breast and abdomen."
Mitchell has had four previous attempts to overturn his conviction. Two were rejected on appeal and a bid to have his case referred to the UK Supreme Court was also turned down at the High Court in Edinburgh. Another appeal was refused by miscarriage of justice investigators at the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. Additionally, on 2nd February 2011, his appeal against sentence was also dismissed.
In 2014, Sandra Lean with the help of QC human rights lawyer, Maggie Scott – now a High Court Judge – lodged an appeal to present on Mitchell’s behalf to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), it was rejected!
Sympathetic though we might all be to her predicament, is it not the case that Corinne Mitchell's circumstances have been brought about by her own actions?
-
There are two other elements which must be taken into account in considering the original claim that Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong.
The first of these were the numerous attacks on Corinne's caravan business at Dalkeith, Scotland, known as Scott's Caravans. Corinne Mitchell was a co-director of this company, the other co-director being her mother, Mrs Ruby Guetta.
These attacks were mentioned by Mrs Mitchell more recently in the Channel 5 crime documentary, "Murder in a small town". It appears that local vigilantes took it upon themselves to exact revenge against the Mitchell family home and business following the conviction of Luke Mitchell.
Undoubtedly, Mrs Mitchell lost a considerable amount financially following the attacks on her caravan business when on one occasion upwards of 40 caravans were systematically damaged.
But why I'm sure you ask yourself was Mrs Mitchell targeted in such a manner when it was her son who was convicted of the murder of Jodi Jones?
To understand this you have to understand the case against Luke Mitchell which was an entirely a circumstantial one. Ultimately, Luke Mitchell's defence rested on his alibi. He claimed to have been home with his mother at the time of the murder. This claim has always been supported by his mother who gave a statement and testified in court. Unfortunately for Luke Mitchell however, his brother was home at the time but ultimately failed to corroborate his alibi after changing his statement.
The difficulty in law in all of this however is that the conviction renders Corinne Mitchell's claims false and giving false evidence to any court is an act of perjury. This I contend would have incited the attacks against her.
Anyone reading this therefore would not be blamed for thinking that Mrs Mitchell was the instrument of her own downfall.
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/mum-luke-mitchell-caravan-park-2275604
-
Which brings me to the second part of this sad saga, the death of John McCafferty, 56, from carbon monoxide poisoning, after staying in a caravan sold to his sister-in-law by Corinne Mitchell. Mrs McCafferty was also poisoned and incapacitated by the noxious gas but survived because she was in a bedroom at the back of the caravan.
Mrs McCafferty raised a civil action against Scott's caravans for £250,000.
The Court of Session heard that Mr McCafferty lit the gas heater in the caravan and during the night, carbon monoxide from the flue of the heater re-entered the caravan and both suffered poisoning.
Mrs McCafferty, 59, a bakery assistant, of Mayfield, Dalkeith, is suing for the grief and sorrow of losing her husband, and for her own physical injuries and the subsequent depression which she says she suffered.
She alleges in the action that, in spite of Scott's Caravans representations, the caravan had not been serviced and inspected prior to the sale, or, if it had been, the inspection and service had not identified and corrected a defect in the installation of the heater.
Scott's Caravans does not admit that a representation was made about the caravan having been fully serviced and inspected, but says it was the invariable practice for its engineers to carry out an inspection of a caravan before agreeing to offer it for sale, on behalf of a third party. Also, it was "the invariable practice for their engineers to inspect a caravan again prior to completing the sale".
In the preliminary hearing, counsel for Scott's Caravans argued that there was "special cause" for keeping the case before a judge alone, and not allowing a jury to consider it.
Scott's Caravans stated that it had carried out an inspection, and the question was whether it had done so properly, it was said.If the company had, it would have checked the heater installation and found that the installation had not been carried out properly.
Lord Stewart said: "Clearly this has to be a matter of impression, but my impression was that this case falls well short of the degree of technical complexity that would make a case unsuitable for trial by a jury."
Lord Stewart said he had not been persuaded that there was good reason for a judge rather than a jury to decide whether Scott's Caravans, of Mayfield Industrial Estate, Dalkeith, Midlothian, and the partners, Mrs Mitchell and Ruby Guetta, were liable for the accident and should pay damages.
In the absence of any further court edicts in the case the question must be asked if this was settled out of court?
https://www.scotsman.com/news/murderer-mitchells-mother-sued-ps-14m-over-deadly-caravan-1687143
-
Which brings me to the second part of this sad saga, the death of John McCafferty, 56, from carbon monoxide poisoning, after staying in a caravan sold to his sister-in-law by Corinne Mitchell. Mrs McCafferty was also poisoned and incapacitated by the noxious gas but survived because she was in a bedroom at the back of the caravan.
Mrs McCafferty raised a civil action against Scott's caravans for £250,000.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/murderer-mitchells-mother-sued-ps-14m-over-deadly-caravan-1687143
What was the outcome of the case?
-
What was the outcome of the case?
Given that we know a lawyer made an application for this to be treated as special case and not seen by a jury, and that application was rejected:
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff85760d03e7f57ebe998
... yet we didnt ever see the case put before a jury (that I know)
is it safe to assume this was settled privately, out of court?
I don't know the answer myself
-
Given that we know a lawyer made an application for this to be treated as special case and not seen by a jury, and that application was rejected:
https://www.casemine.com/judgement/uk/5a8ff85760d03e7f57ebe998
... yet we didnt ever see the case put before a jury (that I know)
is it safe to assume this was settled privately, out of court?
I don't know the answer myself
I believe we need some more answers about this. I find it hard to believe that Mrs McCafferty dropped the action against Scott's Caravans so the only alternative is that a private settlement was agreed.
Clearly, Mrs Mitchell had a vested interest in not going to court again. Her now financial predicament would lend much support to the notion of a private settlement having taken place. Certainly the 2014 sale of the family home took place shortly after the civil court case.
Any ideas?
-
I believe we need some more answers about this. I find it hard to believe that Mrs McCafferty dropped the action against Scott's Caravans so the only alternative is that a private settlement was agreed.
Clearly, Mrs Mitchell had a vested interest in not going to court again.
Or the action was dropped....notwithstanding that you find it hard to believe.
-
Sandra would know, why don’t you ask her?
-
Or the action was dropped....notwithstanding that you find it hard to believe.
There's an easy way to find that out from the Court of Session in Edinburgh.
-
Sandra would know, why don’t you ask her?
She knows alright. @)(++(*
-
There's an easy way to find that out from the Court of Session in Edinburgh.
Off you go then. I’ll be right here when you get back.
-
Taking all the circumstances into consideration I think unfortunately Mrs Mitchell could be considered to be the architect of her own misfortune as far as her financial situation is concerned.
I think it is wrong to make the claim that it results from " a justice system gone wrong" because although the verdict may not have been to her liking it has stood the test of appeals.
If people wish to answer an appeal for financial contributions to ease her burden that is for them to decide ~ but based on accurate information which I don't think this is.
-
Taking all the circumstances into consideration I think unfortunately Mrs Mitchell could be considered to be the architect of her own misfortune as far as her financial situation is concerned.
I think it is wrong to make the claim that it results from " a justice system gone wrong" because although the verdict may not have been to her liking it has stood the test of appeals.
If people wish to answer an appeal for financial contributions to ease her burden that is for them to decide ~ but based on accurate information which I don't think this is.
Most people are gullible in my experience and are suckers for a good cause. The least they should have is ALL the facts.
To coin a phrase from an old lawyer friend of mine, I can see this grow legs now.
-
Most people are gullible in my experience and are suckers for a good cause. The least they should have is ALL the facts.
To coin a phrase from an old lawyer friend of mine, I can see this grow legs now.
Yes FACTS are always good.
-
Taking all the circumstances into consideration I think unfortunately Mrs Mitchell could be considered to be the architect of her own misfortune as far as her financial situation is concerned.
I think it is wrong to make the claim that it results from " a justice system gone wrong" because although the verdict may not have been to her liking it has stood the test of appeals.
If people wish to answer an appeal for financial contributions to ease her burden that is for them to decide ~ but based on accurate information which I don't think this is.
Absolutely but unfortunately that doesn’t always happen as we know.
People knew they were donating to help Corrine, no deception there and, in their judgement as they did donate, this is a case of the justice system gone wrong. You may not agree but you know what they say....opinions are like noses.
-
Yes FACTS are always good.
They are indeed jixy....and some of us don’t even get them from the gutter press....weird I know!
-
Sandra Lean opened a GoFundMe page to raise £10,000 on Luke Mitchell’s behalf in 2019 claiming that the money would enable her to concentrate all her time to proving Mitchell innocent.
The page was removed for violating the GoFundMe terms of service.
It seems she has had more success this time round having raised £17,035 to date: the comments made by donors are a testament to the power of television and make for interesting reading.
-
Sandra Lean opened a GoFundMe page to raise £10,000 on Luke Mitchell’s behalf in 2019 claiming that the money would enable her to concentrate all her time to proving Mitchell innocent.
The page was removed for violating the GoFundMe terms of service.
It seems she has had more success this time round having raised £17,035 to date: the comments made by donors are a testament to the power of television and make for interesting reading.
It seems to be the common thread running through this sad saga Brietta. A failed charity, a GoFundMe account suspended, a Facebook page blocked and now yet another GoFundMe begging bowl based on a LIE which could also be seen as false representation.
-
She’s selling loads of books now though, which is nice - for her.
-
She’s selling loads of books now though, which is nice - for her.
Yes, a book based on lies disguised as the truth imo. Sandra Lean's idea of the truth appears to be somewhat divorced from that accepted in society as a whole. She calls herself a criminologist which is an insult to the profession. Her failure to recognise false innocence campaigns will always haunt her thus the desperation to have the Luke Mitchell conviction overturned.
-
They are indeed jixy....and some of us don’t even get them from the gutter press....weird I know!
Th facts do have a habit of being changed then deleted.
-
Th facts do have a habit of being changed then deleted.
Facts that have been changed should be deleted imo.
-
Facts that have been changed should be deleted imo.
All my posts then &^^&* I post and the words get changed then deleted .
-
All my posts then &^^&* I post and the words get changed then deleted .
Are you saying you've posted factual information about the case on here that has been altered and then deleted?
-
Th facts do have a habit of being changed then deleted.
Let's here those facts then?
-
Facts that have been changed should be deleted imo.
I agree
-
Think you should ask yourself some questions about this...as per my previous post off topic it goes and look who does it again.two posts and you confirmed everything I have written
Thanks.
You appear to be talking in riddles - what questions?
If you have any questions ask them
-
Yes FACTS are always good.
Are these ‘facts’ you refer to only ‘good’ when it suits you?
-
Simple concise document, with all the facts laid out
Might also be worthwhile to include a timeline of Mitchell’s behaviour leading up to the murder - including the evidence from one of his friends (witnesses) where it is said Mitchell stabbed Jodi in the leg with a knife
-
Well you seem to have been involved in the case for a while, why don't you post something to help us all understand??
May also be an idea or explore the dynamics of Mitchell’s relationship with his mother Corrine
Prof Jane Monckton Smith’s work a useful resource on this
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49481998
-
Might also be worthwhile to include a timeline of Mitchell’s behaviour leading up to the murder - including the evidence from one of his friends (witnesses) where it is said Mitchell stabbed Jodi in the leg with a knife
That has all been gone through before, there are threads with timelines.
-
That has all been gone through before, there are threads with timelines.
I agree Angelo
-
I think it would be good for the facts for and against to be laid out, then us newbies would have something to go on.
Simple concise document, with all the facts laid out for Guilty and all the facts for Innocent, sorry but the IMO brigade doesn't cut it for me, a veteran of several juries, seeing how it works from the jury perspective.
Blatantly obvious to the newcomers to this site that some on here have a bee in their bonnet re Sandra Lean. That's their prerogative, but to try and then convince others, who are quite capable of making their own minds up, says more about the individuals on here than it does about anything else!!!
On a personal note, I think this thread is poor, people donated to help Corrine, no matter what any of us think, and Go Fund Me should ensure that the money the public donated in good faith goes to her.
This is nothing more than a petty squabble, on the surface anyway, that is how it appears.
In my opinion you really do need to hold back just a wee bit and consider the tone of your posts such as this one.
Which I find insulting to this forum and to its members.
I am a newcomer to this board and have absolutely no axe to grind until such time as my intelligence is insulted.
Which it most vehemently was when I viewed the recent documentary which was a one sided vindication of a murderer.
I knew nothing about Sandra Lean or her deep bond to this case but believe you me the woman made quite a negative impression on me when I viewed and listened to what she had to say.
I would not presume to speculate on what motivates her. But she was quite open about her GoFundMe aim in 2019 and her page was taken down.
I think it possible she has revisited that and worked on a more acceptable form of words for 2021.
-
I would not presume to speculate on what motivates her. But she was quite open about her GoFundMe aim in 2019 and her page was taken down.
I think it possible she has revisited that and worked on a more acceptable form of words for 2021.
An interesting observation Brietta
-
Then do us all a favour put it into a simple thread, sheet etc
It's been done before is a get out, when newbies could be directed to a closed thread, for example, with all the relevant info, for and against, in it.
Adter reading through, they can join in the discussion threads!!
‘Cults’ might be another topic of conversation some posters may be interested in discussing ?
William Ramsey’s work on ‘cults’ may be another useful resource
Paul Morantz on the ‘movement’ also interesting
-
Wind your neck in Boring Fart, just who the hell do you think you are bossing people around like you own the place?
It seems to work for other posters on this forum. They are trying to learn about the case. Granted it's definitely not the best place for it
-
Nice of you to pay so much attention to my profile... 8(0(*
I wasn’t paying attention to your ‘profile’ it was your ‘footnote’
-
It seems to work for other posters on this forum. They are trying to learn about the case. Granted it's definitely not the best place for it
It's quite sweet that you are completely blind to the faults of Boring Fart but he or she has been rude and aggressive from the off, not a good way to learn about the case (not that I believe for one moment that that is his or her agenda here).
-
It's quite sweet that you are completely blind to the faults of Boring Fart but he or she has been rude and aggressive from the off, not a good way to learn about the case (not that I believe for one moment that that is his or her agenda here).
I agree VS, they have only been here two minutes and have received a warning already.
-
collating every single piece of information about the case would be a huge amount of work for anyone, and the source of countless arguments as people of all persuations argued about what is and isnt of value, what is and isnt true, what is and isnt corroborated.
everyone wants this to be a simple case with simple answers but unfortunately life isnt that easy
what we can do is critique the info that is out there for source, bias, motivation, and agreement with historical fact, to help evaluate its worth
-
Many thanks for your response, however I'm not really interested in your opinion, I am interested in the facts of the case.
Now over several days I have asked the same time and again, and all I, and many others get, is avoiding, or excuses.
You'll also have to excuse me, if I do not for 1 minute believe you are a genuine newbie, no newbie I know jumps so readily on the Sandra Lean is a .... fill in the blank, bandwagon
Try and behave, we don't tolerate trollish behaviour here.
-
fwiw i'm openly extremely critical of sandra lean and convinced beyond reasonable doubt of lukes guilt and my posts here are moderately heavily all the time, probably because i include external links to twitter often and or to protect the forum from any claims of directing critics to external profiles on other sites
-
People have been misled by Sandra Lean. It wasn't the justice system that left Corinne Mitchell living in a shed, it was her son, her lies and her irresponsibility which caused the death of a man. I for one have no sympathy whatsoever for her.
In my opinion Sandra Lean is an unfit person to run such a fund, her last charity was dissolved because she didn't provide accounts.
GoFundMe are undertaking a legal review of the page given what occurred previously.
-
fwiw i'm openly extremely critical of sandra lean and convinced beyond reasonable doubt of lukes guilt and my posts here are moderately heavily all the time, probably because i include external links to twitter often and or to protect the forum from any claims of directing critics to external profiles on other sites
You and me both WakeyWakey 8((()*/
And I’ve been openly critical of most of those involved in the Simon Hall fiasco and of many of those in the innocence fraud ‘movement’ - as I view it
Including of the criminal cases review commission - who have still yet to explain where it all went wrong in relation to their reviews of Halls murder conviction
-
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/mum-luke-mitchell-caravan-park-2275604
Why didn’t the filmmakers make it clear Corrine Mitchell had been rehoused around a year before their show was broadcast?
-
Why didn’t the filmmakers make it clear Corrine Mitchell had been rehoused around a year before their show was broadcast?
Sympathy vote. More false information.
-
Sympathy vote. More false information.
When was Corrine rehoused?
-
Sandra Lean stated to her ‘friends’ on social media she would be contacting Jane Hamilton at the Daily Record following the articles she wrote on Mitchell & the manufactured channel 5 show
She even provided contact details for Ms Hamilton to her ‘friends’ but it’s appears she never bothered to contact her
Anyone know what excuses Sandra Lean is making for this?
Or was it never her intention to contact Jane Hamilton directly?
https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/publics-true-crime-obsessions-like-23617822.amp?__twitter_impression=true
-
Sandra Lean stated to her ‘friends’ on social media she would be contacting Jane Hamilton at the Daily Record following the articles she wrote on Mitchell & the manufactured channel 5 show
She even provided contact details for Ms Hamilton to her ‘friends’ but it’s appears she never bothered to contact her
Anyone know what excuses Sandra Lean is making for this?
Or was it never her intention to contact Jane Hamilton directly?
How do you know who Sandra Lean contacted privately?
-
Having taken legal advice on this, it appears that Sandra Lean is seeking public donations on the GoFundMe website on the basis of at least one false premise.
She claims in her introduction that, "Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong. Although she has now been housed, this fundraiser is aimed at helping get Corinne back on her feet".
How exactly has the justice system gone wrong? Surely this claim is just that, a claim, an opinion, it is certainly not an established fact.
Luke Mitchell has been tried and convicted according to the laws of Scotland, he has had several appeals all of which have failed. He has also had the benefit of a more recent further Application to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission supported by one of Scotland's top QCs who just happens to now be a High Court Judge. This again failed to get any traction so the claim that Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong is in fact untrue and false according to Law.
On the 21st January 2005, Corinne Mitchell's younger son Luke Mitchell was convicted of the murder of his then 'girlfriend' Jodi Jones, and sentenced to a minimum of 20-years in prison.
The charge...
"...on 30 June 2003 at a wooded area near Roan's Dyke between Easthouses Road, Easthouses and Newbattle Road, both Dalkeith, Midlothian, you did assault Jodi Catherine Jones ... and did repeatedly strike her on the head and body, compress and constrict her neck and restrict her breathing, cause her to fall to the ground, apply a ligature around her arms, repeatedly strike her on the head, mouth and body with a knife or other similar instrument and you did murder her and further you did strike her head and body with a knife or similar instrument and in particular her face, ear, mouth, breast and abdomen."
Mitchell has had four previous attempts to overturn his conviction. Two were rejected on appeal and a bid to have his case referred to the UK Supreme Court was also turned down at the High Court in Edinburgh. Another appeal was refused by miscarriage of justice investigators at the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. Additionally, on 2nd February 2011, his appeal against sentence was also dismissed.
In 2014, Sandra Lean with the help of QC human rights lawyer, Maggie Scott – now a High Court Judge – lodged an appeal to present on Mitchell’s behalf to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), it was rejected!
Sympathetic though we might all be to her predicament, is it not the case that Corinne Mitchell's circumstances have been brought about by her own actions?
It's heartwarming to see that the GoFundMe organization doesn't suffer fools gladly and has responded to public complaints.
-
My only involvement, as an accredited journalist, with Sandra Lean is via this post from July last year. She has steadfastly refused to engage with me and, more crucially, not sought to correct the falsehoods on which the Truthseeker podcast in issue was predicated. UK Justice Forum contributors/readers are invited to draw their own conclusions from that:
https://neilwilby.com/2020/06/22/dr-truthseeker-loses-her-moral-compass/
Having taken legal advice on this, it appears that Sandra Lean is seeking public donations on the GoFundMe website on the basis of at least one false premise.
She claims in her introduction that, "Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong. Although she has now been housed, this fundraiser is aimed at helping get Corinne back on her feet".
How exactly has the justice system gone wrong? Surely this claim is just that, a claim, an opinion, it is certainly not an established fact.
Luke Mitchell has been tried and convicted according to the laws of Scotland, he has had several appeals all of which have failed. He has also had the benefit of a more recent further Application to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission supported by one of Scotland's top QCs who just happens to now be a High Court Judge. This again failed to get any traction so the claim that Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong is in fact untrue and false according to Law.
On the 21st January 2005, Corinne Mitchell's younger son Luke Mitchell was convicted of the murder of his then 'girlfriend' Jodi Jones, and sentenced to a minimum of 20-years in prison.
The charge...
"...on 30 June 2003 at a wooded area near Roan's Dyke between Easthouses Road, Easthouses and Newbattle Road, both Dalkeith, Midlothian, you did assault Jodi Catherine Jones ... and did repeatedly strike her on the head and body, compress and constrict her neck and restrict her breathing, cause her to fall to the ground, apply a ligature around her arms, repeatedly strike her on the head, mouth and body with a knife or other similar instrument and you did murder her and further you did strike her head and body with a knife or similar instrument and in particular her face, ear, mouth, breast and abdomen."
Mitchell has had four previous attempts to overturn his conviction. Two were rejected on appeal and a bid to have his case referred to the UK Supreme Court was also turned down at the High Court in Edinburgh. Another appeal was refused by miscarriage of justice investigators at the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. Additionally, on 2nd February 2011, his appeal against sentence was also dismissed.
In 2014, Sandra Lean with the help of QC human rights lawyer, Maggie Scott – now a High Court Judge – lodged an appeal to present on Mitchell’s behalf to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), it was rejected!
Sympathetic though we might all be to her predicament, is it not the case that Corinne Mitchell's circumstances have been brought about by her own actions?
-
My only involvement, as an accredited journalist, with Sandra Lean is via this post from July last year. She has steadfastly refused to engage with me and, more crucially, not sought to correct the falsehoods on which the Truthseeker podcast in issue was predicated. UK Justice Forum contributors/readers are invited to draw their own conclusions from that:
https://neilwilby.com/2020/06/22/dr-truthseeker-loses-her-moral-compass/
Is Sandra Lean a member here? If not I’m not sure what you wish to achieve with your post.
-
Is Sandra Lean a member here? If not I’m not sure what you wish to achieve with your post.
What does anyone hope to achieve with their posts. I for one found the link to Wilby’s blog post very interesting.
-
No idea whether Sandra Lean is a member on UKJC, or not. But this thread is all about her. She is also a hot topic following her recent appearance on Channel 5 television. My article, posted against my own name, not anonymously, seeks to add perspective. If it's of no interest to you, please scroll on by.
Is Sandra Lean a member here? If not I’m not sure what you wish to achieve with your post.
-
My only involvement, as an accredited journalist, with Sandra Lean is via this post from July last year. She has steadfastly refused to engage with me and, more crucially, not sought to correct the falsehoods on which the Truthseeker podcast in issue was predicated. UK Justice Forum contributors/readers are invited to draw their own conclusions from that:
https://neilwilby.com/2020/06/22/dr-truthseeker-loses-her-moral-compass/
Cheers Neil, that was an enlightened article. Sandra Lean has history of involvement in false innocence cases, toy knowledge she has NEVER managed to have any conviction for murder overturned. Her failures are well known within this forum and the wider miscarriage of justice community.
Having her on your team is tantamount to the kiss of death for any campaign given her history.
-
No idea whether Sandra Lean is a member on UKJC, or not. But this thread is all about her. She is also a hot topic following her recent appearance on Channel 5 television. My article, posted against my own name, not anonymously, seeks to add perspective. If it's of no interest to you, please scroll on by.
It appears that you’re continuing blackening individuals names. Haven’t you learned anything from your numerous court cases?
-
Cheers Neil, that was an enlightened article. Sandra Lean has history of involvement in false innocence cases, toy knowledge she has NEVER managed to have any conviction for murder overturned. Her failures are well known within this forum and the wider miscarriage of justice community.
Having her on your team is tantamount to the kiss of death for any campaign given her history.
If Luke Mitchell's conviction does turn out to be a MOJ, some people are going to be eating their words!!
Unless of course, they refuse to believe it.
-
It appears that you continuing blackening individuals names. Haven’t you learned anything from your numerous court cases?
One could ask Sandra Lean whether she had learned anything from continually trying to secure the release of proven self-confessed murderers.
-
If Luke Mitchell's conviction does turn out to be a MOJ, some people are going to be eating their words!!
Unless of course, they refuse to believe it.
Of course they’ll refuse to believe it but Luke will be free, his conviction quashed and that’s all that matters in the end.
-
Of course they’ll refuse to believe it but Luke will be free, his conviction quashed and that’s all that matters in the end.
Just like some people refuse to believe Luke is guilty as charged.
-
If Luke Mitchell's conviction does turn out to be a MOJ, some people are going to be eating their words!!
Unless of course, they refuse to believe it.
Mitchell did not take the stand at his trial to protest his innocence. He relied on the defence of ALIBI which proved to be false.
Why on earth would you suggest that he might have suffered a miscarriage of justice when the best defence that could be mustered on his behalf was a downright lie?
-
If Luke Mitchell's conviction does turn out to be a MOJ, some people are going to be eating their words!!
Unless of course, they refuse to believe it.
I'll be the first to say sorry but I doubt it will ever happen. I don't believe in coincidences and there would be far too many in this case for Luke Mitchell to be innocent.
-
One could ask Sandra Lean whether she had learned anything from continually trying to secure the release of proven self-confessed murderers.
She ignores that question continually. John even asked her several times on the Jibber Jabber YouTube channel and she blanked him. She never answers any questions about the indisputable evidence.
-
Mitchell did not take the stand at his trial to protest his innocence. He relied on the defence of ALIBI which proved to be false.
Why on earth would you suggest that he might have suffered a miscarriage of justice when the best defence that could be mustered on his behalf was a downright lie?
Are you referring to the false alibi?
-
Are you referring to the false alibi?
Yes.
The one he and his mother promoted about him preparing a meal which was not supported by his brother who admitted to discussing what he was to say to the police with his mother.
He had to change his statement later when inspection of his computer led to the police knowing exactly what he was doing and when he was doing it and that he had not seen his brother despite originally saying he had seen him 'mashing tatties'.
-
Yes.
The one he and his mother promoted about him preparing a meal which was not supported by his brother who admitted to discussing what he was to say to the police with his mother.
He had to change his statement later when inspection of his computer led to the police knowing exactly what he was doing and when he was doing it and that he had not seen his brother despite originally saying he had seen him 'mashing tatties'.
I notice Shane has refused to put his name to Lean's campaign. He was always the key to this case, Luke Mitchell was either in the house or he wasn't. It's not a difficult question.
-
Sandra Lean is apparently in the ‘midst of basically selling her house to go back - she’s making her own van - to go back out and be 100% of the time a traveller again’
-
Having taken legal advice on this, it appears that Sandra Lean is seeking public donations on the GoFundMe website on the basis of at least one false premise.
She claims in her introduction that, “Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong. Although she has now been housed, this fundraiser is aimed at helping get Corinne back on her feet".
How exactly has the justice system gone wrong? Surely this claim is just that, a claim, an opinion, it is certainly not an established fact.
Luke Mitchell has been tried and convicted according to the laws of Scotland, he has had several appeals all of which have failed. He has also had the benefit of a more recent further Application to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission supported by one of Scotland's top QCs who just happens to now be a High Court Judge. This again failed to get any traction so the claim that Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong is in fact untrue and false according to Law.
On the 21st January 2005, Corinne Mitchell's younger son Luke Mitchell was convicted of the murder of his then 'girlfriend' Jodi Jones, and sentenced to a minimum of 20-years in prison.
The charge...
"...on 30 June 2003 at a wooded area near Roan's Dyke between Easthouses Road, Easthouses and Newbattle Road, both Dalkeith, Midlothian, you did assault Jodi Catherine Jones ... and did repeatedly strike her on the head and body, compress and constrict her neck and restrict her breathing, cause her to fall to the ground, apply a ligature around her arms, repeatedly strike her on the head, mouth and body with a knife or other similar instrument and you did murder her and further you did strike her head and body with a knife or similar instrument and in particular her face, ear, mouth, breast and abdomen."
Mitchell has had four previous attempts to overturn his conviction. Two were rejected on appeal and a bid to have his case referred to the UK Supreme Court was also turned down at the High Court in Edinburgh. Another appeal was refused by miscarriage of justice investigators at the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. Additionally, on 2nd February 2011, his appeal against sentence was also dismissed.
In 2014, Sandra Lean with the help of QC human rights lawyer, Maggie Scott – now a High Court Judge – lodged an appeal to present on Mitchell’s behalf to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), it was rejected!
Sympathetic though we might all be to her predicament, is it not the case that Corinne Mitchell's circumstances have been brought about by her own actions?
Is Luke Mitchell benefitting financially from his crimes?
‘CAD: Hey folks
Sorry if not allowed to be asked or if it has indeed been asked before but are we allowed to send funds to prison? I just realised after being told that luke has to pay for his postage stamps to send replies, I would imagine there's commissary that he can buy as well.
I know it's against gofundme rules to donate for this kinda cause but can we donate or gift if we choose?
Anyone know? I'm not sure how prison works at all.
And should prisons be allowing convicted killers to receive ‘gifts’ from members of the public ?
‘FS: ‘If anyone would like to send Luke some cash. Pm me and I will give you the details and how.
-
Having taken legal advice on this, it appears that Sandra Lean is seeking public donations on the GoFundMe website on the basis of at least one false premise.
She claims in her introduction that, “Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong. Although she has now been housed, this fundraiser is aimed at helping get Corinne back on her feet".
How exactly has the justice system gone wrong? Surely this claim is just that, a claim, an opinion, it is certainly not an established fact.
Luke Mitchell has been tried and convicted according to the laws of Scotland, he has had several appeals all of which have failed. He has also had the benefit of a more recent further Application to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission supported by one of Scotland's top QCs who just happens to now be a High Court Judge. This again failed to get any traction so the claim that Corinne Mitchell's life was ruined by a justice system gone wrong is in fact untrue and false according to Law.
On the 21st January 2005, Corinne Mitchell's younger son Luke Mitchell was convicted of the murder of his then 'girlfriend' Jodi Jones, and sentenced to a minimum of 20-years in prison.
The charge...
"...on 30 June 2003 at a wooded area near Roan's Dyke between Easthouses Road, Easthouses and Newbattle Road, both Dalkeith, Midlothian, you did assault Jodi Catherine Jones ... and did repeatedly strike her on the head and body, compress and constrict her neck and restrict her breathing, cause her to fall to the ground, apply a ligature around her arms, repeatedly strike her on the head, mouth and body with a knife or other similar instrument and you did murder her and further you did strike her head and body with a knife or similar instrument and in particular her face, ear, mouth, breast and abdomen."
Mitchell has had four previous attempts to overturn his conviction. Two were rejected on appeal and a bid to have his case referred to the UK Supreme Court was also turned down at the High Court in Edinburgh. Another appeal was refused by miscarriage of justice investigators at the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. Additionally, on 2nd February 2011, his appeal against sentence was also dismissed.
In 2014, Sandra Lean with the help of QC human rights lawyer, Maggie Scott – now a High Court Judge – lodged an appeal to present on Mitchell’s behalf to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC), it was rejected!
Sympathetic though we might all be to her predicament, is it not the case that Corinne Mitchell's circumstances have been brought about by her own actions?
Who is Fiona Scott referring to here ⬇️ ?
Who has ‘shat on’ this groups idea to raise money for Corinne Mitchell via this ‘fundraising lottery’ (Now seemingly in its 6th week) https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/luke-mitchell-supporters-launch-fundraising-20696850 ?
Fiona Scott
‘This is another good thing that’s been shat on from a great height. Why?
Anyway we keep going for Corinne like we promised we would.
Let’s get this filled before the draw
Week 6
-
Is Luke Mitchell benefitting financially from his crimes?
‘CAD: Hey folks
Sorry if not allowed to be asked or if it has indeed been asked before but are we allowed to send funds to prison? I just realised after being told that luke has to pay for his postage stamps to send replies, I would imagine there's commissary that he can buy as well.
I know it's against gofundme rules to donate for this kinda cause but can we donate or gift if we choose?
Anyone know? I'm not sure how prison works at all.
And should prisons be allowing convicted killers to receive ‘gifts’ from members of the public ?
‘FS: ‘If anyone would like to send Luke some cash. Pm me and I will give you the details and how.
I remember your plea for stamps and assistance with travel etc. Was that ok back in the day then?
-
I remember your plea for stamps and assistance with travel etc. Was that ok back in the day then?
To travel where and who were the stamps for please?
-
I remember your plea for stamps and assistance with travel etc. Was that ok back in the day then?
To travel where and who were the stamps for please?
🥱
-
To travel where and who were the stamps for please?
SH...
-
🥱
The faces you pull when you cant defend the abuse you give to others while you have done the very same thing yourself.
-
🥱
I see. The money for travel was for you? That's not the same as a convicted prisoner receiving the money directly. Wasn't Corinne's GoFundMe pulled because GoFundMe heard CM was giving the money to LM and that's against their rules?
-
I see. The money for travel was for you? That's not the same as a convicted prisoner receiving the money directly. Wasn't Corinne's GoFundMe pulled because GoFundMe heard CM was giving the money to LM and that's against their rules?
It's exactly the same....
-
She knows alright. @)(++(*
If the action was dropped, wouldn't there be profits from the house sale allowing CM to find somewhere better to live? Of course she may have had other debts to settle. That's a possibility too but considering CM doesn't own the land Scott's Caravans stood on, it was kind of the owner to allow CM to live there for six years.
-
All this blagging?
Where is the truth? This working away with people for five years on what can/can't be done/said? - to this removal of stuff from social media nonsense when the blagging two years ago was that a legal team were already on board.
I'm sorry, this continuously just shows how dishonest these people are. Taking advantage of susceptible people for money? Using firstly CM's health and lack of wealth as a front? This plea for money has been going on for over two years. Kickstarted at first for Lean to pay for her man hours. Who's employment status appears to be on one of those zero hours type basis? No contract as can readily just not work for weeks on end?
What has effectively happened since this doc went out? First and foremost it has been the continuation of that push for funds? By various means of which Lean has stated she needed to be in control of. To run the shop front so to speak of this IB charity? And what can be taken as avoidance of paying any duty on sales? As one was asked to buy direct and not via Amazon. Losing that money trail. I'm not accusing Lean of this, I am simply stating it is a means to make more money. What also happened is over 200 sales went missing? Money paid but no books? And Lean hinted that someone on high was trying to stop her word from being spread? Utter nonsense in this bloody big conspiracy theory. For this other group who were concentrating on the Mitchell side wanted to keep hold of the purse strings. In short has the main battle being that of holding the purse strings? Of Lean not being trusted?? Has word from forums and people commenting on social media brought some shady areas to light? Namely that of the old WAP, where one of the registered names was untraceable? Made up.
And then and only then coming second is that drive to campaign, to spread the word, to spread the word to erm buy the book? So it again comes back to money. That when this was slowing down, up pops this new legal team and out pops certain people from social media? As after 5 years of working around what can and can't be said, a legal team already blagged about two years ago? Up pops another which is not really about Mitchell but the excuse to retreat?
And yes Faith/Dexter people are questioning all of this and rightly so, for honestly is very much top of the bill here. For this book is promoting the murderer of Jodi Jones. By quite literally using the same form of blagging to gain support, in blagging that Mitchell could be innocent. It is high profile, it will grab interest and it will hopefully bring in money. But where is the trust? How can people even begin to put trust in something, that is first and foremost born from misinformation, that false premise of being "The true story of the murder of Jodi Jones" Written by someone who had formed a jigsaw puzzle back in 2003. Done at a time when three people firmly believed Mitchell would not be arrested? Under the pretence of being someone worth any salt, expertise, a DR in criminology to boot? When most of what is present in theory in the book was founded prior to Mitchells arrest. Then blagged about for many years until the POA was granted?
It could not be further from the truth for the truth lies in everything - Not these false claims over time of having access to "all" on this case - A blatant lie for the true story of the murder of Jodi Jones does not stem from LM's defence - That is a fact.
-
All this blagging?
Where is the truth? This working away with people for five years on what can/can't be done/said? - to this removal of stuff from social media nonsense when the blagging two years ago was that a legal team were already on board.
I'm sorry, this continuously just shows how dishonest these people are. Taking advantage of susceptible people for money? Using firstly CM's health and lack of wealth as a front? This plea for money has been going on for over two years. Kickstarted at first for Lean to pay for her man hours. Who's employment status appears to be on one of those zero hours type basis? No contract as can readily just not work for weeks on end?
What has effectively happened since this doc went out? First and foremost it has been the continuation of that push for funds? By various means of which Lean has stated she needed to be in control of. To run the shop front so to speak of this IB charity? And what can be taken as avoidance of paying any duty on sales? As one was asked to buy direct and not via Amazon. Losing that money trail. I'm not accusing Lean of this, I am simply stating it is a means to make more money. What also happened is over 200 sales went missing? Money paid but no books? And Lean hinted that someone on high was trying to stop her word from being spread? Utter nonsense in this bloody big conspiracy theory. For this other group who were concentrating on the Mitchell side wanted to keep hold of the purse strings. In short has the main battle being that of holding the purse strings? Of Lean not being trusted?? Has word from forums and people commenting on social media brought some shady areas to light? Namely that of the old WAP, where one of the registered names was untraceable? Made up.
And then and only then coming second is that drive to campaign, to spread the word, to spread the word to erm buy the book? So it again comes back to money. That when this was slowing down, up pops this new legal team and out pops certain people from social media? As after 5 years of working around what can and can't be said, a legal team already blagged about two years ago? Up pops another which is not really about Mitchell but the excuse to retreat?
And yes Faith/Dexter people are questioning all of this and rightly so, for honestly is very much top of the bill here. For this book is promoting the murderer of Jodi Jones. By quite literally using the same form of blagging to gain support, in blagging that Mitchell could be innocent. It is high profile, it will grab interest and it will hopefully bring in money. But where is the trust? How can people even begin to put trust in something, that is first and foremost born from misinformation, that false premise of being "The true story of the murder of Jodi Jones" Written by someone who had formed a jigsaw puzzle back in 2003. Done at a time when three people firmly believed Mitchell would not be arrested? Under the pretence of being someone worth any salt, expertise, a DR in criminology to boot? When most of what is present in theory in the book was founded prior to Mitchells arrest. Then blagged about for many years until the POA was granted?
It could not be further from the truth for the truth lies in everything - Not these false claims over time of having access to "all" on this case - A blatant lie for the true story of the murder of Jodi Jones does not stem from LM's defence - That is a fact.
After watching the C5 documentary I was disappointed to find out CM had been housed but it wasn't made clear when the documentary was aired. During a global pandemic when people's futures are so insecure the impression was deliberately given CM was still living like that and people were donating their hard earned cash. That was the first thing that made me question everything else. It was deliberately deceptive IMO.
-
After watching the C5 documentary
How much money were each of those individuals who appeared on the show paid?
https://www.digitalspy.com/tv/reality-tv/a867564/reality-tv-pay-wages/
https://www.quora.com/How-much-if-anything-are-people-paid-to-appear-on-TV-news-shows-as-pundits-or-commentators
And were some people paid and others not?
And didn’t Sandra Lean make the claim it took a year to make the show?
How did she fit in filming and ‘advising’ between her alleged part time jobs? ⬇️ ⬇️
‘She told Facebook followers:
“I’ve done this in my spare time and have had to take on other jobs to support me.”
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-news/6919979/crime-expert-sandra-lean-fund-effort-free-luke-mitchell/
-
Has word from forums and people commenting on social media brought some shady areas to light? Namely that of the old WAP, where one of the registered names was untraceable? Made up.
What was this alleged ‘made up’ named person called?
-
After watching the C5 documentary I was disappointed to find out CM had been housed but it wasn't made clear when the documentary was aired. During a global pandemic when people's futures are so insecure the impression was deliberately given CM was still living like that and people were donating their hard earned cash. That was the first thing that made me question everything else. It was deliberately deceptive IMO.
The documentary was also deliberately aimed at mums - it certainly pulled a few in, tbf.
-
A blatant lie for the true story of the murder of Jodi Jones does not stem from LM's defence - That is a fact.
No it doesn’t
“Whatever merits Sandra Lean's book and her appraisal of the evidence in the Park case may have, they are, to my mind, completely eclipsed by her entrenched and overwhelming antagonism towards and her disdain for the way that the organs of the criminal justice system operate and conduct their affairs.”
http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/Former-prosecutor-publishes-book-backing-Lady-in-the-Lake-murder-conviction-5999268a-951e-413c-9ed6-9562fdc5819f-ds
And Dick Binsteads comments apply to all the killers cases Sandra wrote about in ‘No Smoke’
-
After watching the C5 documentary I was disappointed to find out CM had been housed but it wasn't made clear when the documentary was aired. During a global pandemic when people's futures are so insecure the impression was deliberately given CM was still living like that and people were donating their hard earned cash. That was the first thing that made me question everything else. It was deliberately deceptive IMO.
I seen it posted on social media. The day after the ch5 doc land surveyors moved in. Maybe they waited untill the doc was aired?
-
I seen it posted on social media. The day after the ch5 doc land surveyors moved in. Maybe they waited untill the doc was aired?
CM lived there for five or six years. Maybe she rented the land? She could have still held the lease? It was a Dickensian way to live. No toilet, no water, rat infested, freezing cold, CM's I'll health.... CM being rehoused before the documentary was aired should have been made crystal clear. It was deceptive IMO especially when there was a cash collection involved.
-
CM lived there for five or six years. Maybe she rented the land? She could have still held the lease? It was a Dickensian way to live. No toilet, no water, rat infested, freezing cold, CM's I'll health.... CM being rehoused before the documentary was aired should have been made crystal clear. It was deceptive IMO especially when there was a cash collection involved.
It was emotionally manipulative and no doubt meant to be *&^^&
-
If - as Sandra Lean claimed there were others involved in the case for the past 5+ years - what help, if any, did they offer Corinne Mitchell and why didn’t they use their YouTube platforms (Sharon Indy sunshine, Paul Capaldi & all the other MaM super fans) to raise funds to help her?
And did Lisa Peden know her ‘friend’ was living like this?
-
The documentary was also deliberately aimed at mums - it certainly pulled a few in, tbf.
Yeah or anyone who has/had a mum....everyone! I found out by accident CM had been rehoused the year before. I was shocked at first. It's extortion IMO and although con artists do It all the time, the last place I expected to see it was on a documentary about justice.
-
I see. The money for travel was for you? That's not the same as a convicted prisoner receiving the money directly. Wasn't Corinne's GoFundMe pulled because GoFundMe heard CM was giving the money to LM and that's against their rules?
I’m sorry but if you can’t see the hypocrisy with Nicholas haranguing Dr Lean when she appeals for monetary help when she did the same thing then you really aren’t paying attention.
-
.It's extortion IMO and although con artists do It all the time, the last place I expected to see it was on a documentary about justice.
Add exploitation to that
-
I’m sorry but if you can’t see the hypocrisy with Nicholas haranguing Dr Lean when she appeals for monetary help when she did the same thing then you really aren’t paying attention.
Did she
-
I’m sorry but if you can’t see the hypocrisy with Nicholas haranguing Dr Lean when she appeals for monetary help when she did the same thing then you really aren’t paying attention.
Was Nicholas a convicted prisoner when he/she received money?
-
Yeah or anyone who has/had a mum....everyone! I found out by accident CM had been rehoused the year before. I was shocked at first. It's extortion IMO and although con artists do It all the time, the last place I expected to see it was on a documentary about justice.
And why did SM stand by and let his mother live like that? I will leave posters and lurkers to come to their own conclusions of why.
-
I’m sorry but if you can’t see the hypocrisy with Nicholas haranguing Dr Lean when she appeals for monetary help when she did the same thing then you really aren’t paying attention.
And I’ve had no direct contact with Sandra Lean since I posted on the Bamber forum - therefore your suggestion I’m ‘haranguing’ her ill placed
-
Was Nicholas a convicted prisoner when he/she received money?
Careful
-
Yeah or anyone who has/had a mum....everyone! I found out by accident CM had been rehoused the year before. I was shocked at first. It's extortion IMO and although con artists do It all the time, the last place I expected to see it was on a documentary about justice.
It was neither Dr Lean’s or Corrine’s fault that the documentary makers did not make it clear that Corrine had been rehoused, perhaps it was done for dramatic effect. What did happen was that as soon as she was asked about where Corrine was living Dr Lean answered that she had been rehouse yet people still wanted to donate. You can’t blame both women for that.
-
Can I just say, that we get control of the constant badgering and bulling of Nicholas on these threads. If people want to bring up that particular case, then i suggest they start a new thread elsewhere and stop clogging up the Luke Mitchell threads.
-
Did she
Yes you did.
-
Was Nicholas a convicted prisoner when he/she received money?
I’m not talking about Luke but Nicholas and Dr Lean.
-
Can I just say, that we get control of the constant badgering and bulling of Nicholas on these threads. If people want to bring up that particular case, then i suggest they start a new thread elsewhere and stop clogging up the Luke Mitchell threads.
And if you were a moderator members may take notice of your suggestion.
-
It was neither Dr Lean’s or Corrine’s fault that the documentary makers did not make it clear that Corrine had been rehoused, perhaps it was done for dramatic effect. What did happen was that as soon as she was asked about where Corrine was living Dr Lean answered that she had been rehouse yet people still wanted to donate. You can’t blame both women for that.
I have no idea if the documentary makers knew CM had even been rehoused but CM certainly must have known.
-
Careful
Apologies but I'm still trying to work all of that out.
-
Apologies but I'm still trying to work all of that out.
What is it you are trying to work out
and why don’t you send me a message if you genuinely have a question ?
-
What is it you are trying to work out
and why don’t you send me a message if you genuinely have a question ?
I've tried. I'm blocked @)(++(*
-
I have no idea if the documentary makers knew CM had even been rehoused but CM certainly must have known.
The footage could have been filmed a year before it was shown. CM does not have a presence on social media but Dr Lean as and she told everyone at the earliest opportunity that Corrine had been rehoused. Donators however still donated. I can’t make the details any clearer.
-
Land was sold in 2017
https://mayfield-online.scot/
-
The footage could have been filmed a year before it was shown. CM does not have a presence on social media but Dr Lean as and she told everyone at the earliest opportunity that Corrine had been rehoused. Donators however still donated. I can’t make the details any clearer.
Very convenient land surveyors moved in the day after the doc. Maybe cm waited to try gain some sympathy then agreed to move out after?
-
Very convenient land surveyors moved in the day after the doc. Maybe cm waited to try gain some sympathy then agreed to move out after?
The documentary took a year to make. The footage of Corrine could have been recorded anytime within that year and Corrine could have been rehoused before it was aired. Does it really have to be explained that Corrine had no control over when the documentary was aired?
-
The documentary took a year to make. The footage of Corrine could have been recorded anytime within that year and Corrine could have been rehoused before it was aired. Does it really have to be explained that Corrine had no control over when the documentary was aired?
She was still collecting drink from the shell garage. CM knew when she was leaving cm knew when it was being aired. Make of that what you will...
-
She was still collecting drink from the shell garage. CM knew when she was leaving cm knew when it was being aired. Make of that what you will...
What I’ll make of it is that you have posted no evidence of the above.
-
Very convenient land surveyors moved in the day after the doc. Maybe cm waited to try gain some sympathy then agreed to move out after?
The documentary took a year to make and during the documentary SF says, MK died last year. MK died in 2018. Within the first half of 2018.
-
The documentary was also deliberately aimed at mums - it certainly pulled a few in, tbf.
It pulled in all sorts by the looks of it
Why do you say the documentary was ‘aimed at mums’?
-
The footage could have been filmed a year before it was shown. CM does not have a presence on social media but Dr Lean as and she told everyone at the earliest opportunity that Corrine had been rehoused. Donators however still donated. I can’t make the details any clearer.
Was Corinne Mitchell paid to appear on the show?
And what about Sandra Lean - was she paid?
-
The footage could have been filmed a year before it was shown. CM does not have a presence on social media but Dr Lean as and she told everyone at the earliest opportunity that Corrine had been rehoused. Donators however still donated. I can’t make the details any clearer.
Why did Sandra Lean choose after the show had aired to launch a go fund me page for Corinne Mitchell and not in the weeks/months/years before?
Only a couple of years before Sandra had set up a go fund me page for herself
Why not also one for Corinne - especially given her living conditions allegedly at the time ?
-
It pulled in all sorts by the looks of it
Why do you say the documentary was ‘aimed at mums’?
I think, IMO, the documentary was definitely aimed at women but what they got, I believe, were more head cases than they could handle. Not all, of course, but a lot of them. IMO.
-
What I’ll make of it is that you have posted no evidence of the above.
She was often with a younger guy in a corsa, skin head and a tattoo on the side of his face... ;)
-
She was often with a younger guy in a corsa, skin head and a tattoo on the side of his face... ;)
Really?
-
Why do you say the documentary was ‘aimed at mums’?
Because it did.
It played heavily on the forced separation of CM and LM - predictably tugging at the heart strings of watching moms.
It played down the relationship between CM and her other son, though.
Funny, that.
-
I think, IMO, the documentary was definitely aimed at women but what they got, I believe, were more head cases than they could handle. Not all, of course, but a lot of them. IMO.
You think?
Johnny Boy Steel
Paul Capaldi
Stuart Dempsey
Derek Edmund
Kenny
Jim Nelson
Jibber Jabber -
Ed ‘Edward’ Johnston
Ivor Batey
The 4 amigos 🙄
to name a few
-
You think?
Johnny Boy Steel
Paul Capaldi
Stuart Dempsey
Derek Edmund
Kenny
Jim
Jibber Jabber -
Edward
Not them. The C5 documentary wasn't aimed at them, I think. The C5 documentary was aimed at women, it was extortion, exploitation and dishonest, IMO. Misogynistic at and sly, IMO
-
The C5 documentary wasn't aimed at them, I think. The C5 documentary was aimed at women, it was extortion, exploitation and dishonest, IMO. Misogynistic at and sly, IMO
I concur
For me - It was an extremely dangerous piece of work and I’ve been surprised by the silence from so called experts in their field on these points
TV shows like that ought to come with a warning
-
I concur
For me - It was an extremely dangerous piece of work and I’ve been surprised by the silence from so called experts in their field on these points
TV shows like that ought to come with a warning
The audiences of these podcasters are the same people who support LM and who tune into SL.
-
The audiences of these podcasters are the same people who support LM and who tune into SL.
Are you referring to making a murderer ?
-
Are you referring to making a murderer ?
Jibber Jabber, Paul Capaldi....... Mostly the same audience over the board, mostly appealing to the same people. Very much mostly women. I have a screenshot of RM calling Scottish Bike Squad, The Seer, Janine did it, blah, blah, sir!
-
Jibber Jabber, Paul Capaldi....... Mostly the same audience over the board, mostly appealing to the same people. Very much mostly women. I have a screenshot of RM calling Scottish Bike Squad, The Seer, Janine did it, blah, blah, sir!
Oh okay I wasn’t sure what you meant there for a moment - I was distracted also
RM referred to Mark McKeown as ‘sir’ ?
Who’s RM ?
Oh Rosemary ?
-
Oh okay I wasn’t sure what you meant there for a moment - I was distracted also
RM referred to Mark McKeown as ‘sir’ ?
Who’s RM ?
Oh Rosemary ?
Yes. I could have spewed. IMO.
-
Yes. I could have spewed. IMO.
Is he still trolling ?
Sandra Lean states,
”Oh yeah trolls on YouTube.
Now I can’t say too much about this but can I ask please that you don’t make reference to particular trolls at the minute all will become clear but for now please don’t make reference to actual trolls whether they are real names or fake names or whether you know or you don’t know just for now please erm again there’s stuff going on”
And when is this ⬆️ going to ‘become clear’?
-
Was Corinne Mitchell paid to appear on the show?
And what about Sandra Lean - was she paid?
No idea but you could have asked her….if she had still given you the time of day
-
She was often with a younger guy in a corsa, skin head and a tattoo on the side of his face... ;)
I know…that was my brother !
-
Not them. The C5 documentary wasn't aimed at them, I think. The C5 documentary was aimed at women, it was extortion, exploitation and dishonest, IMO. Misogynistic at and sly, IMO
Misogynistic? In what way?
-
Misogynistic? In what way?
In the way of using vulnerable women. The kind of women who are.prepared to threaten other women. Supporters who should be called out and then helped. Instead, they're excused, denied, enabled.
-
In the way of using vulnerable women. The kind of women who are.prepared to threaten other women. Supporters who should be called out and then helped. Instead, they're excused, denied, enabled.
Where's the mysogyny on this forum please? You didn't point it out.
-
No idea but you could have asked her….if she had still given you the time of day
How could CM have been asked if she doesn't do social media?
-
In the way of using vulnerable women. The kind of women who are.prepared to threaten other women. Supporters who should be called out and then helped. Instead, they're excused, denied, enabled.
No I didn’t think you knew what misogyny meant.
-
Was Corinne Mitchell paid to appear on the show?
And what about Sandra Lean - was she paid?
No idea but you could have asked her….if she had still given you the time of day
Who’s ‘her’ ?
-
No idea but you could have asked her….if she had still given you the time of day
She sided with a factually guilty killer of a ‘defenceless older lady’
-
Very convenient land surveyors moved in the day after the doc. Maybe cm waited to try gain some sympathy then agreed to move out after?
Yeah that' seems odd. If the land was sold in 2017, MK died in 2018 and the documentary took a year to make then was CM living there from 2017 -2019?
-
Sandra lean dropped off alcohol alot more recent than that.
-
Sandra lean dropped off alcohol alot more recent than that.
I don't understand how CM was allowed to live there after the land was sold. Perhaps they had to honour a lease? It just seems odd.
-
Sympathy vote. More false information.
No to mention more money.