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: Bullseye on November 30, 2022, 12:13:24 PM
-
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9846975/cops-destroyed-evidence-jodi-jones-luke-mitchell/
Thought this deserved its own post. Absolutely shocking that this was allowed to go ahead. We always knew the police did a poor job during the investigation now seems they are looking to cover things up in my opinion. Just hope they have not destroyed everything and there is still stuff Scott, Sandra and the team can have retested.
-
Yes, I agree. It's awful.
-
Part 140 Killer Luke Mitchell: And Yet More On LIARS & ABUSERS Scott Forbes & Sandra Lean & Their Innocence FRAUD
👇
http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/11/30/killer-luke-mitchell-and-yet-more-on-liars-abusers-scott-forbes-sandra-lean-their-innocence-fraud-part-140/
-
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9846975/cops-destroyed-evidence-jodi-jones-luke-mitchell/
Thought this deserved its own post. Absolutely shocking that this was allowed to go ahead. We always knew the police did a poor job during the investigation now seems they are looking to cover things up in my opinion. Just hope they have not destroyed everything and there is still stuff Scott, Sandra and the team can have retested.
Nonsense - Lets actually dissect this a little. The inference being that they have destroyed evidence which could finally show Mitchell to be innocent.
Firstly, it is 12yrs legally for things to be retained in a 'solved' series crime. It has been 17yrs since Mitchell's guilty verdict alone. This since 2014 to 26 is nonsense. When that refusal came back from the SCCRC. There would have had to be something directly from them, of stipulating that 'certain' things should be retained longer. And even IF this has happened, it certainly is NOT around what Ms Lean nor Mr Forbes believe should have been there for them, in this needle in a haystack for some imaginary silver bullet. It would be around 'certain' things and not the thousands of stuff gathered and labelled in a list. Just because they apply the word 'evidence' to everything does not make it anything of the sort.
The quote from the Crown, really? This is not around destroying evidence, it is around disposing of items personally belonging to Mitchell, who should have been contacted prior to disposing of his items. Legal action that may be taken for NOT contacting him, now halted to see if what is remaining in that list has anything he desires to have back?
Confused? That massive list of labelled items, storage and the legal time well past its date to retain. Putting 'production' 'evidence' and all together - Behave. We can take the wall for a start, absolutely nothing to do with forensic evidence, it was a production which would have been taken up masses of storage. So do you believe that for every Tom, Dick and Harry bleating innocence, that Mitchell should have been favoured in some way. The law bent and shaped solely around him? 17yrs and NOT 8yrs.
What will be retained without any doubt will be forensic samples to do with the crime itself. These types of certain things that are kept with many crimes, solved or otherwise.
But please - This nonsense of things being "hidden" from his defence, seriously? Let us just take one of their "hidden" examples, that knife in the skip, plastered all over the media in 2003. The have been given a list of productions and oohing over it, with the usual manipulation applied to it. Oh, someone had a coat taken from them, oh there is my essays I was on about. - Utter nonsense.
The majority of stuff obtained NOT used by either the Crown or defence, of no value, such as knife in skip that yielded nothing of the victim. Ms Mitchell and the 'everything' they removed of Luke's. With only a tiny fraction of these used at trial. His shiny green coat, his knife, the pouch and so forth.
-
Just hope they have not destroyed everything and there is still stuff Scott, Sandra and the team can have retested.
Kind of ironic the psycho killer is claiming the police destroyed evidence
@)(++(*
Fantasy ‘Lawyer’ Scott ‘Beam Me Up Scottie!’ Forbes & The Killers Missing Bike
👇
http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/11/19/killer-luke-mitchell-fantasy-lawyer-scott-beam-me-up-scottie-forbes-the-killers-missing-bike-part-127/
-
I refuse to give "The Sun" any traffic. But i'm curious who the journalist source is? Or don't they name anyone and just claim a source told the sun type script?
-
I refuse to give "The Sun" any traffic. But i'm curious who the journalist source is? Or don't they name anyone and just claim a source told the sun type script?
This misogynist grifter maybe - or someone linked to him
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/5364587/forensics-expert-defence-lawyer-scots-dna/
-
I refuse to give "The Sun" any traffic. But i'm curious who the journalist source is? Or don't they name anyone and just claim a source told the sun type script?
Ruth Brown
All I can say is the Sun's involvement makes me feel a little cautious
James Hanratty
Ruth Brown Why?
Ruth Brown
James Hanratty because after the down right lies the printed about the Hillsborough disaster, would you trust them?
Sandra Lean
Ruth Brown I understand your caution, Ruth, but, on this occasion, the reporter concerned has acted with trust and integrity throughout
Robert James Livingstone
I am in doubt about this and it’s screamingly clear that the destroying the evidence which could only prove he is innocent is a tactic to avoid corrupt police and The Sun Daily mail and Daily record from corruption.
I think what the SCPS May do is treat this case the same way they did with Barry George .Rather than accept Luke is innocent they will possibly say that the conviction is not certain anymore therefore can’t prove his guilt or innocence.He may be released as it’s an unsafe conviction.Meaning he cannot sue those that in an act of absolute EVIL convicted him .And the sun has absolutely no shame as they were instrumental in concocting a conviction by press .The whole thing stinks .
Sandra Lean
Robert James Livingstone We have to remember, Robert, many of the reporters from back then are gone, others have matured and discovered the murky goings on at the heart of some of the publications involved. All I can say is, thank goodness those people are willing to stand up for the truth now.
For what it's worth, an appeal would NEVER say Luke is innocent (unless the real perpetrator is caught) - all they can ever say is that the conviction is unsafe and can no longer stand.
I have a quote from an appeal judge saying exactly this somewhere - I'll see if I can find it..
-
Ruth Brown
All I can say is the Sun's involvement makes me feel a little cautious
Sandra Lean
Robert James Livingstone We have to remember, Robert, many of the reporters from back then are gone, others have matured and discovered the murky goings on at the heart of some of the publications involved.
@)(++(* Oh so, hacks are now the best thing since sliced bread. Deary me. They are probably worse than ever, to be fair.
-
This misogynist grifter maybe - or someone linked to him
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/5364587/forensics-expert-defence-lawyer-scots-dna/
I don't even need to click on the link to know who the "forensics expert" is.
Man that tried to impersonate a police officer, so he could bully, intimidate and terrorize a woman on her own. Yea he sounds really trustworthy.
-
@)(++(* Oh so, hacks are now the best thing since sliced bread. Deary me. They are probably worse than ever, to be fair.
And ‘trainees’ like John Glover are ideal targets for the fraud
-
I don't even need to click on the link to know who the "forensics expert" is.
Man that tried to impersonate a police officer, so he could bully, intimidate and terrorize a woman on her own. Yea he sounds really trustworthy.
I view him to be more of a fraud than an ‘expert’
And his fraudulent spiel during MIAST with ‘blood on door handles’ etc
*&^^&
Will be publishing a video he featured in during the coming weeks
-
Jim Nelson
CROWN OFFICE who is in charge
LORD ADVOCATE
who is in charge
Who can we talk to
INTERESTING
murder in small town Feb 2021
New lord advocate appointed june 2021
Evidence destroyed Sept 2021
Is there a pattern here ??
Sandra Lean
You ready for this, Jim Nelson??? The new Lord Advocate is Dorothy Bain. She is the wife of ... Alan Turnbull. Who's he again? Oh, yes, I remember - the prosecutor in the Luke Mitchell case.
-
Was it pretend lawyer Scott Forbes who told Douglas Walker of the sun
”This could lead to a judicial review which could even pave a way to his release.”
@)(++(*
-
I don't even need to click on the link to know who the "forensics expert" is.
Man that tried to impersonate a police officer, so he could bully, intimidate and terrorize a woman on her own. Yea he sounds really trustworthy.
Doesn’t he just *&^^&
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9407554/princess-diana-death-lab-blunder/
-
Nonsense - Lets actually dissect this a little. The inference being that they have destroyed evidence which could finally show Mitchell to be innocent.
Firstly, it is 12yrs legally for things to be retained in a 'solved' series crime. It has been 17yrs since Mitchell's guilty verdict alone. This since 2014 to 26 is nonsense. When that refusal came back from the SCCRC. There would have had to be something directly from them, of stipulating that 'certain' things should be retained longer. And even IF this has happened, it certainly is NOT around what Ms Lean nor Mr Forbes believe should have been there for them, in this needle in a haystack for some imaginary silver bullet. It would be around 'certain' things and not the thousands of stuff gathered and labelled in a list. Just because they apply the word 'evidence' to everything does not make it anything of the sort.
The quote from the Crown, really? This is not around destroying evidence, it is around disposing of items personally belonging to Mitchell, who should have been contacted prior to disposing of his items. Legal action that may be taken for NOT contacting him, now halted to see if what is remaining in that list has anything he desires to have back?
Confused? That massive list of labelled items, storage and the legal time well past its date to retain. Putting 'production' 'evidence' and all together - Behave. We can take the wall for a start, absolutely nothing to do with forensic evidence, it was a production which would have been taken up masses of storage. So do you believe that for every Tom, Dick and Harry bleating innocence, that Mitchell should have been favoured in some way. The law bent and shaped solely around him? 17yrs and NOT 8yrs.
What will be retained without any doubt will be forensic samples to do with the crime itself. These types of certain things that are kept with many crimes, solved or otherwise.
But please - This nonsense of things being "hidden" from his defence, seriously? Let us just take one of their "hidden" examples, that knife in the skip, plastered all over the media in 2003. The have been given a list of productions and oohing over it, with the usual manipulation applied to it. Oh, someone had a coat taken from them, oh there is my essays I was on about. - Utter nonsense.
The majority of stuff obtained NOT used by either the Crown or defence, of no value, such as knife in skip that yielded nothing of the victim. Ms Mitchell and the 'everything' they removed of Luke's. With only a tiny fraction of these used at trial. His shiny green coat, his knife, the pouch and so forth.
According to the latest update it was more than just personal belongings of Luke, the fingernail scrapping surely should have been kept?
Wonder what is left from all they took to be destroyed?
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9856406/luke-mitchell-jodi-jones-police-evidence-destroyed-dna/
-
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9856406/luke-mitchell-jodi-jones-police-evidence-destroyed-dna/
Douglas Walker and the suns innocence fraud fest
“Two essays entitled “No Remorse” by a now-deceased local drug addict were also taken away. This described killing a girl in the woods
“Police stated previously that another essay entitled “Killing A Girl In The Woods” didn’t exist.”
*&^^&
“Lawyer Scott Forbes of Mitchell’s legal team said: “I’m of the opinion that from the outset, police have lied about, hidden, and manipulated the evidence in this case. The recent developments support this.
“Lies about search warrants and essays were told to the High Court. The green parka coat was manipulated and hidden, as was Jodi's psychology reports and several knives.
*&^^&
-
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9856406/luke-mitchell-jodi-jones-police-evidence-destroyed-dna/
Did either of these two fraudsters (Lean & Forbes) receive a payment from the sun for this nonsense ?
-
According to the latest update it was more than just personal belongings of Luke, the fingernail scrapping surely should have been kept?
Wonder what is left from all they took to be destroyed?
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9856406/luke-mitchell-jodi-jones-police-evidence-destroyed-dna/
Innocence fraud is keeping this HOAX PR gravy train campaign going round
There are no new legal arguments nor is there any new evidence - not that aides the guilty killer in anyway at least
-
Innocence fraud is keeping this HOAX PR gravy train campaign going round
There are no new legal arguments nor is there any new evidence - not that aides the guilty killer in anyway at least
Isn’t that why the team wanted the evidence in the first place? To retest it so they might find new evidence from it like dna that could then help to provide new legal arguments?
-
Isn’t that why the team wanted the evidence in the first place? To retest it so they might find new evidence from it like dna that could then help to provide new legal arguments?
killer Luke Mitchell agreed during his trial, via his legal team, that DNA couldn’t assist him and fraudster Marilyn Moseby can’t help him out
👇
Killer Luke Mitchell’s DNA & The Constant Lies & Manipulation By Hoaxer Sandra Lean (Part 128)
👇
https://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/11/19/killer-luke-mitchell-dna-the-constant-lies-manipulation-by-sandra-lean-part-128/
-
I don't even need to click on the link to know who the "forensics expert" is.
Man that tried to impersonate a police officer, so he could bully, intimidate and terrorize a woman on her own. Yea he sounds really trustworthy.
He’ll be involved somewhere for sure
-
killer Luke Mitchell agreed during his trial, via his legal team, that DNA couldn’t assist him and fraudster Marilyn Moseby can’t help him out
👇
Killer Luke Mitchell’s DNA & The Constant Lies & Manipulation By Hoaxer Sandra Lean (Part 128)
👇
https://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/11/19/killer-luke-mitchell-dna-the-constant-lies-manipulation-by-sandra-lean-part-128/
Does that mean they can’t use any new dna finding if it was retested? Or do you just mean he agreed back then it couldn’t help him therefore he has made his choice, so to speak?
Back then dna testing might not have helped him but the testing has came on leaps and bounds since then so who knows what they might find, but if it’s all been destroyed then we will never know.
-
Does that mean they can’t use any new dna finding if it was retested?
It means if psychopathic killer Luke Mitchell (and his innocence fraud enablers) wants to appeal his convictions he will have to make another application to the SCCRC
👇
https://www.sccrc.co.uk/making-an-application-old
-
but if it’s all been destroyed then we will never know.
What exactly are the fraudsters claiming were destroyed?
And have you seen any official documents regarding these alleged destructions?
-
Back then dna testing might not have helped him but the testing has came on leaps and bounds since then so who knows what they might find, but if it’s all been destroyed then we will never know.
DNA is circumstantial evidence and won’t make any real difference to killer Luke Mitchell’s convictions
The only way he’ll ever be able to overturn his convictions is by somehow showing that he and his mother and brother (Corinne and Shane Mitchell) weren’t lying
Like in the case of killer Simon Hall - the Mitchell families lies and concoctions are woven into the general framework of this case/convictions
-
Does that mean they can’t use any new dna finding if it was retested? Or do you just mean he agreed back then it couldn’t help him therefore he has made his choice, so to speak?
Back then dna testing might not have helped him but the testing has came on leaps and bounds since then so who knows what they might find, but if it’s all been destroyed then we will never know.
DNA tests were carried out on a sock, said to be used by the mass murderer, child killer and sexual deviant David (Dai) Morris. The tests came back as a match and still his family denied his obvious guilt https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/sock-found-clydach-murders-scene-21895944
-
According to the latest update it was more than just personal belongings of Luke, the fingernail scrapping surely should have been kept?
Wonder what is left from all they took to be destroyed?
https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9856406/luke-mitchell-jodi-jones-police-evidence-destroyed-dna/
Bullseye - Mainly highlighting the legal aspect of things. Not around what may have been disposed of. It is 12yrs for series solved crime in Scotland around everything. The only inclusion of the SCCRC into anything, is if they specifically placed a 'clause' around the retainment of anything from that point. And IF this clause is there, then it would only be around certain things and not the everything.
But let us be blatantly frank here, this is Forbes and Lean here we are talking about. Now whilst some place faith in these people there are certainly more who see right through them. Ms Lean is however being just a little more honest (I think), around the why? 'What is the problem in keeping everything if they are so sure of guilt. The timings and then the usual manipulation around, is it just a coincidence they are being disposed of when a review is being sought. ---------------'
The only rat I smell here is the usual bog-standard manipulation, and where Forbes is concerned then anything bloody goes. does it not? He opens up his mouth and most of what is produced is sheer fantasy. He was stating in the past MK was involved, he is now stating others are the killer/s. He is telling you of his x-ray vision to see through rucksacks and contents of whopping big bowie knives - Does this make it true? No of course not, he just makes things up.
It is attempting to at least place some sense here. - Whatever these people are able to see on a list, then it is without any doubt something his original defence, and any subsequent appeals were also able to see. IF they chose not to use anything then those actual professionals had very good reason for NOT doing so. Not the fantasy and sheer nonsense drooling forth from him. Nor his fellow enabler.
And still the penny does NOT drop, does it? You, yourself were told that one could NOT discuss anything around re-testing due to the legal team at the time, there was no legal team. What there does however appear to be, tying in with that claim, is knowledge of sorts at that point, that things were being signed off.
I mentioned 2018/19 when Ms Lean had already placed her deadline around testing, of two years, when she had her begging bowl out for funding. Now what was that date actually from? That took us to 2021 at a push, then items being signed off for disposal or return. All seems to be tying together here, does it not?
The only problem and failure I see, is of Mitchell not being able to secure someone worth their salt, in pushing things forward to have any re-testing carried out. But and again, we do NOT forget the testing already carried out by the SCCRC, and I do wonder if it is this 'new' testing that must be retained for X amount of time. Just a thought.
-
From a link upthread: "But since the formation of the Scottish Police Authority and single force in 2013, defence briefs have been banned from seeing the cops’ secret forensics files. It means scientific police evidence — including DNA samples — must be accepted as fact without scrutiny. Scotland is the only country in the civilised world where lawyers are denied access to this key evidence."
Some time ago I discussed in blog entries why it was important for the defense to have full access to electronic DNA data in an unprocessed form. As Dr. Jamieson indicated, there have been many cases around the world in which careful scrutiny of the records has uncovered errors. There is no good reason not to give the defense full access, but there are bad ones.
-
"FINGERNAIL scrapings of murdered schoolgirl Jodi Jones were among the pieces of evidence illicitly taken by cops to destroy, we can reveal.
The key samples would likely have contained DNA from her convicted killer Luke Mitchell if she tried to fight him off."
Fingernail scrapings are potentially highly probative pieces of evidence. One reason for this is that several studies have measured how frequently foreign DNA is found underneath fingernails under ordinary circumstances.
-
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/police-accused-concealing-evidence-could-28641480
What does interest me is the change in tone in the last two articles posted about Mitchell. It appears the media is finally waking up to the grave injustice Luke’s conviction is.
-
This case boggles the mind. Elsewhere on the internet, someone opined that the police probably know that he is innocent and are trying to keep it under wraps. I am finding it increasingly difficult to disagree.
-
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/police-accused-concealing-evidence-could-28641480
@)(++(*
“Officers from Lothian and Borders Police are said to have hidden two copies of an essay”
Further evidence innocent Mark Kane was traced, investigated and eliminated
-
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/police-accused-concealing-evidence-could-28641480
What does interest me is the change in tone in the last two articles posted about Mitchell. It appears the media is finally waking up to the grave injustice Luke’s conviction is.
Both that article and The Sun refer to "Lawyer Scott Forbes and LM's legal team". Firstly SF isn't a lawyer and secondly who are the legal team? Absolute nonsense that's trying to drive up sales/web hits.
-
Both that article and The Sun refer to "Lawyer Scott Forbes and LM's legal team". Firstly SF isn't a lawyer and secondly who are the legal team? Absolute nonsense that's trying to drive up sales/web hits.
Yep
And neither ‘experienced’ reporter John Glover, Douglas Walker/the Sun etc can’t say they don’t/didn’t know about fraudster Scott Forbes
-
https://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/news/scottish-news/police-accused-concealing-evidence-could-28641480
Fraudster Scott Forbes pretending he’s spoken to an ‘insider’ at the SCCRC
@)(++(*
-
Fraudster Scott Forbes pretending he’s spoken to an ‘insider’ at the SCCRC
@)(++(*
Just like he has claimed, one of [Name removed] doctors gave them his medical records. But be living in cloud cuckoo land to believe the nonsense that comes from his mouth.
-
Both that article and The Sun refer to "Lawyer Scott Forbes and LM's legal team". Firstly SF isn't a lawyer and secondly who are the legal team? Absolute nonsense that's trying to drive up sales/web hits.
Daily Express reminds me of that "Take a break mag" soap opera BS.
-
"The insider tells me: 'Here is something for you special' ~ fantasist ‘lawyer’ Scott Forbes
@)(++(* @)(++(*
-
Notice how the pair of fraudster - Sandra Lean and Scott Forbes - still won’t publish the SCCRC’s SoR’s
-
Innocent Mark Kane went from
“….a cannabis smoker with unusual tastes in rock music and internet violence might be a possible "suspect"(2008)
To all the things fraudster Scott Forbes has made up about him
*&^^&
I suspect it was Scott Forbes who was prescribed methadone
According to Donald Findlay fantasist Scott Forbes made a statement in January 2008
“The lawyer told appeal judges that Mitchell's defence team had been made aware of the addict by another man, Scott Forbes, who had first come forward some 18 months after Mitchell had been convicted of Jodi's murder and given a life sentence.
Mr Findlay said that Mr Forbes had sworn out a statement last month and his claims were being investigated
-
How much more is it going to take for you people to stop making excuses and finding ways to discredit every detail in favour of Luke’s innocence. Quite frankly I believe you are all in denial of the real truth. Evidence could be tested and proven and you’d still find a way to say it’s bullshit. Your theories are boring me now. Open your eyes for goodness sake. You have as much proof in your statements as prosecutors had on Luke. NOTHING
-
How much more is it going to take for you people to stop making excuses and finding ways to discredit every detail in favour of Luke’s innocence. Quite frankly I believe you are all in denial of the real truth. Evidence could be tested and proven and you’d still find a way to say it’s bullshit. Your theories are boring me now. Open your eyes for goodness sake. You have as much proof in your statements as prosecutors had on Luke. NOTHING
Prosecutors had no proof on Luke…interesting.
-
Prosecutors had no proof on Luke…interesting.
Correct!!!
-
How much more is it going to take for you people to stop making excuses and finding ways to discredit every detail in favour of Luke’s innocence. Quite frankly I believe you are all in denial of the real truth. Evidence could be tested and proven and you’d still find a way to say it’s bullshit. Your theories are boring me now. Open your eyes for goodness sake. You have as much proof in your statements as prosecutors had on Luke. NOTHING
Thanks for your input. I'm glad you got that of your chest.
Retesting has been done, you need to ask your leader to publish the SCCRC report from the last appeal, or the one before that, i'm sure its in them somewhere 8((()*/
Now, until the Mitchell's can prove they were not lying every step of the way. They have failed to do so. Luke will continue to spend most if not all his life behind bars. This is the truth you seek, right?
There is no point in blabbering on about prosecutors having nothing. They got the job done in front of a jury. The case is now closed !!!!
-
"FINGERNAIL scrapings of murdered schoolgirl Jodi Jones were among the pieces of evidence illicitly taken by cops to destroy, we can reveal.
The key samples would likely have contained DNA from her convicted killer Luke Mitchell if she tried to fight him off."
Fingernail scrapings are potentially highly probative pieces of evidence. One reason for this is that several studies have measured how frequently foreign DNA is found underneath fingernails under ordinary circumstances.
Jodi clearly didn’t fight Luke off or there would have been marks on him and he would have had her DNA on him. If I remember correctly the police DID take his clothes and swab him from head to toe did they not? Why bin DNA that can prove you right? That would not happen come on. They have something to hide and no matter what your opinion is there is no explaining this in any other way than cleaning up their mess to save themselves. You are that obsessed with Sandra Lean and Scott Forbes being frauds that you can’t see the wood from the trees. I dont particularly like them myself but I won’t dismiss details just because I dislike them. Illegally Preventing more advanced testing of evidence speaks volumes to me, especially when you are under suspicion of setting the whole thing up. The police know this is too big to allow the truth so they prevent it from ever becoming known. The police are guilty of corruption in this case and I am looking forward to the denials on this forum when it is forensically proven that someone else killed Jodie. Or maybe you will all say nothing who knows. This page should be renamed “The Sandra and Scott show” forget about them and ask yourself could this be possible or are we In denial because of our dislike for the two above ??? *%87
-
Thanks for your input. I'm glad you got that of your chest.
Retesting has been done, you need to ask your leader to publish the SCCRC report from the last appeal, or the one before that, i'm sure its in them somewhere 8((()*/
Now, until the Mitchell's can prove they were not lying every step of the way. They have failed to do so. Luke will continue to spend most if not all his life behind bars. This is the truth you seek, right?
There is no point in blabbering on about prosecutors having nothing. They got the job done in front of a jury. The case is now closed !!!!
Leader ?? Wrong person here. No one leads me. I form my own opinion. You must be rolling about with joy that Luke is being prevented illegally from proving you wrong. When “Mitchell” proves you wrong you will still spew your bullshit one way or another. Keep your Leans and Forbes to yourself and don’t involve me in your obsession with them. You can’t take a real interaction from a real member without accusing of being Lean or Forbes. Change the narrative because quite frankly yes it’s boring.
-
Ok Gummybear. I get it, you are bored with us living in denial. So why exactly are you here? Did you have one too many tonight? And feeling braver to get all your rantings and ravings off your chest? I'll tell them type attitude?
Anyway, none of your rantings changes the fact, the Mitchell's lied, innocent families do not need to lie.
-
One would appear to be very annoyed. Very defensive aren’t we ? @)(++(* &^&*%
-
Both articles -- from The Sun and Daily Express respectively -- are sensationalist and deliberately vague and ambiguous. It seems nothing has actually been destroyed yet. Neither of them state when the scrapings from Jodi's fingernails were confiscated and when exactly they were disposed of or due to be disposed of (of course, there is a strong inference it was all in the recent past -- within the last 2 years -- and not 18/19 years ago). With potentially crucial DNA evidence such as this (Jodi's fingernail scrapings), I'm sure everything was thoroughly analysed with the best equipment at the time -- in 2003/2004 -- and then again by the SCCRC between 2012-2014. Nothing incriminating was found. Not from LM or a stranger. I suppose one could argue that L&BP leaving the body exposed to the elements and rain for 8 full hours could've potentially lost vital evidence -- vital evidence that could've incriminated LM or someone else. The rain undoubtedly rendered a lot of the DNA useless; the rain would've degraded and contaminated the DNA, and hence the numerous inconclusive, non-reportable results, as well as the numerous mixed profiles (as well as the innocent transfer of DNA from other people who'd been in that woodland strip prior to 30.06.03, and innocent transfer from wildlife). So, discussing the DNA in this case, while interesting, is futile (and hence why the Prosecution had to build an extremely robust circumstantial case). I'm sure L&BP would've, in hindsight, covered the body up more quickly after the photographer got done with his work for the SOC, so as to preserve what could've been vital DNA evidence. There's also the difficulty that, as there was so much of Jodi's blood at the SOC, that it could've wiped out every other trace of DNA that may have been present (for example, the perpetrator's fingerprints, saliva or semen). I don't think there is anything sinister in them wanting to discard the fingernail scrapings; I think the crown and l&bp are 100 % confident that LM did it (further reinforced by LM's 3 subsequent failed appeals and the fact the dna, including these fingernail scrapings, was retested by the sccrc in 2012-2014 and nothing was found). While retesting said fingernail scrapings wouldn't do any harm, I think most people think it is pointless and are lijely asking themselves: "How many chances and appeals do you need, Luke?". I personally think all DNA samples should be retained until the convicted is deceased, but anyway ........
As for the burnt clothes, refer to the above. Same applies.
A parka jacket being found at another house? Yawn. Clutching at straws, imo
MK's college essays? See above. Yawn.
Verdict: LM's still as guilty as sin. Must do better.
-
Scott Forbes lies and makes things up
Here is what Mark Kane Aka Mr Rabbit said about him
👇
Sandra Lean is a bully as well as a liar. I was one of the so called accused, not a shred of evidence against me except a statement from a man who has a severe criminal record that has since came to light. I knew all about it from the start I knew it would eventually catch up with him and Sandra Lean. Anytime I contacted her on the 'Luke Mitchell' is innocent website she got right onto her cronies and I would receive death threats over the phone, be visited n public places by he man with the long and hash criminal record who would make threats against and my family. He even went to my mothers door, she is her Sixties and disabled just to show me she could be got at! What type of human being does such a thing? He assaulted me in full view of half a dozen people after I had left a comment on Ms.Leans web pag. All of this I reported to the police. Just to set a couple of things straight I never had big cuts on my face the day after the murder I had a tiny scratch is all, he did not drive me to the police station the day after and he never said what amount of money we would get but he did say we would get money if we spoke to the press and get a wee holiday out of it. I never wanted anything to do with it it was sick, the man bullied me. He got a holiday out of it as the daily record accidentally used his name as the suspect he got just over a grand in damages. I have never received anything for the mental anguish myself and family have been through. I think he was merely a puppet in Sandra Leans games which have now came to a head but I'm still stuck with totally untrue accusations against me and haven't even received a sorry let alone anything else. I knew about his criminal past but I never mentioned it, I never spoke to reporters, which he wanted me to. He used to make jokes about it and him and him only ever brought it up as you know it was nearly 4 years before he came forward after a falling out between us, the police didn't take him serious and he gave a high court statement Han is all lies and I have many witness that can back that up. He bullied me after he had went to the police, trying to keep me in line and watch who I spoke to but I just didn't want anything to do with it god I wasn't even sure he was telling the truth about talking to the police cause like I said he used to make jokes about it. If they haughty they were right then how come whenever I questioned Sandra lean she would get right on to him to go and do her dirty work which was harass me. I have a load of witness to prove everything he said is a lie that's why I was never worried. I just think it's shocking that a man can take half truths, 3rd hand stories and just lies then go to the police with this rubbish and before you know it my name is on the 6 o'clock news, in newspapers giving totally false information about me and iv never received any type of closure or apology or anything from the people involved. Maybe karma has just taken it's time he's been exposed for the violent criminal who done jail for armed robbery and Sandra Lean, not for the first time, is wrong. I went through hell and back because of them but I'm not going to waste my life looking for revenge I knew in time it would all come out. Here's to the innocent among us, don't let the b........s grind you down.
The SCCRC also knows Scott Forbes lies and make things up
It sounds like the SCCRC located a copy of Mark Kane’s essay during their review
-
This 👇is what con-artist Sandra Lean has done to all those people she’s duped into her, and the killer and his mother’s innocence fraud
”They've been lied to, manipulated, misled, their recall influenced
Where’s the evidence for this 👇 Sandra Lean
“We know the police were telling people from the second day that they "knew" Luke was the killer and were just gathering the evidence to prove it.
Mrs Jones twice visited Mr Mitchells’s home. The first time was to comfort him, she said. The second visit was after police searched the Mitchell’s household.
“There was something I had to ask him. It had been in my mind all week”,
she said.
“Why did you not phone me back that night”
He said
“Because I thought you had grounded her”
However, she told the court there was no way he could have thought she was grounded.
IF the police (involved in the investigation) “were telling people from the second day that they “knew” Luke was the killer and were just gathering evidence to prove it” why would the Jones/Walker family be the last people to be told this?
Are you referring to ‘police’ like RosieRubble073 - who commented here https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=XGzKwUlZsMo
“Luke was "arrested" (as the public saw it), his house searched in a blaze of publicity, even though they had NOTHING to suggest he was involved”
The police had a mountain of his lies Sandra Lean all very much suggesting he had been ‘involved’
Not only his lies but the lies of his mother and brother Shane and Corinne Mitchell
the rest was hidden ... and now, almost 20 years on
Killer Luke Mitchell and his mother and brothers statements and transcripts have been ‘hidden’ by them and con-artist Sandra Lean
-
Anyway, none of your rantings changes the fact, the Mitchell's lied, innocent families do not need to lie.
One, everyone lies all of the time. By itself, lying may have either some probative value or none at all; each instance has to be examined individually. Two, the police told some whoppers in this case. By your logic, their lies disprove their case.
EDT
I also think that using failed appeals as evidence of guilt is unconvincing. Lindy Chamberlain lost all of her appeals and was only found to be innocent after a fluke discovery of Azaria's clothing by a dingo lair. Cameron Todd Willingham had about ten appeals and lost all of them. Yet one top fire investigator after another has rubbished the case against him, and his case is used as an object lesson in how not to do an investigation. Even when an appeal is successful, it sometimes has relied on an element of chance, but that is a topic for another day.
-
One, everyone lies all of the time. By itself, lying may have either some probative value or none at all; each instance has to be examined individually. Two, the police told some whoppers in this case. By your logic, their lies disprove their case.
EDT
I also think that using failed appeals as evidence of guilt is unconvincing. Lindy Chamberlain lost all of her appeals and was only found to be innocent by a fluke discovery of Azaria's clothing by a dingo lair. Cameron Todd Willingham had about ten appeals and lost all of them. Yet one top fire investigator after another has rubbished the case against him, and his case is used as an object lesson in how not to do an investigation. Even when an appeal is successful, it sometimes has relied on an element of chance, but that is a topic for another day.
You didn’t mention the Birmingham 6 pub bombers
“…the longer this hearing has gone on the more convinced this court has become that the verdict of the jury was correct” ~ Lord Lane
-
Stuart Dempsey
The jones know who done it. Wish everyone would open there eyes and ears and listen to the whole case. It’s going to be difficult with janine being in the police now Also the uncles who are or were in tbe police at the time of the murder. The whole case is a joke he should be released now
*&^^&
Stuart Dempsey
Mary Thompson I certainly wouldn’t be sitting quiet if I believed it was luke. The jones haven’t even made a comment about anything. You’d think they’d want to correct things. Oh sorry they can’t correct things cause they are the only ones who knows who done it or atleast got a suspicion of who it was. The whole case is a mess. I can’t believe the police have got rid of so much dna including Jodys swabs from her nails. It’s mind boggling
Foolish Stuart Dempsey Follows Michelle Moore & ‘Balls Of Steel’ Scott Forbes
👇
http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/11/01/killer-luke-mitchell-foolish-stuart-dempsey-follows-toxic-abuser-michelle-moore-balls-of-steel-scott-forbes-part-113/
-
Dawn Potten
Well done Sandra the police In Britten are all bent
Darren Carson
Why do you think that they have stayed quite and out the public eye 👁 🤔 cause luke was used as a scape goat by the Jones they know who done just like we do
*&^^&
-
One, everyone lies all of the time.
So, by your logic, what reason did the Mitchell's have to lie all of them time?
-
Scott Forbes lies and makes things up
Here is what Mark Kane Aka Mr Rabbit said about him
👇
The SCCRC also knows Scott Forbes lies and make things up
It sounds like the SCCRC located a copy of Mark Kane’s essay during their review
It seems that MK's DNA was, in fact, taken pre-trial and compared against the DNA found at the crime scene. Nothing incriminating was found, so MK was ruled out early on (see cites below). Also, MK was nothing like LM: he was about a foot taller, was 8 years older and his hair, while being similar in colour, bore no resemblance to LM's style of haircut; LM's hair, as described by AB, was sandy, messy, shoulder-length and sticking up in a clump at the back like the character Shaggy from the 2002 Scooby Doo movie (AB was specific about LM's hairstyle when describing it to police, and specifically compared it to the Shaggy character from that 2002 Scooby Doo movie). MK's hair was never shoulder-length. It's also worth mentioning that LM and Jodi loved Nirvana (Nirvana was actually Jodi's number one favourite band), whose lead singer, Kurt Cobain, had that shoulder-length, messy sandy hair. LM was obviously trying to emulate that Kurt Cobain image -- an image that a lot of teenage girls loved and which LM pulled off successfully (and hence why he was so popular with the girls of his age at the time).
Btw, isn't it also true that MK was captured on cctv miles away from Dalkeith on the afternoon and late afternoon of 30.06.03? And isn't it also true that, when he was actually back in Dalkeith on 30.06.03, he was captured on an off-licence cctv buying alcohol shortly before closing time (2200 hrs)? And this same cctv footage showed that MK didn't have scratches on his face that SF harps on about (in other words, any scratches on his face must've been inflicted after Jodi was murdered)?
Okay, all of the above doesn't prove categorically that he couldn't have done it, but, it does, imo, prove it was highly unlikely that he had done it.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7259126.stm
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/MITCHELL%27S+LAWYERS+HUNT+FOR+WITNESSES%3B+Killer+returns+to+court.-a0173857409
-
It seems that MK's DNA was, in fact, taken pre-trial and compared against the DNA found at the crime scene. Nothing incriminating was found, so MK was ruled out early on (see cites below).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7259126.stm
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/MITCHELL%27S+LAWYERS+HUNT+FOR+WITNESSES%3B+Killer+returns+to+court.-a0173857409
“It also heard how Mr Kane had been pestered and threatened by another man who claimed a confession to the killing would bring them big rewards.
Mr Beckett quoted from a statement Mr Kane, from Stirling, had given to police about the activities of Scott Forbes - the man who put defence lawyers on Mr Kane's trail.
Mr Kane told the officers that Mr Forbes had been pestering him for a week after press reports in December about a possible new suspect.
Did con-artist Sandra Lean include any of this in her second book?
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7259126.stm
Did Sandra Lean, or Corinne Mitchell initiate Scott Forbes threats and intimidatory actions towards Mark Kane?
-
It seems that MK's DNA was, in fact, taken pre-trial and compared against the DNA found at the crime scene. Nothing incriminating was found, so MK was ruled out early on (see cites below).
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7259126.stm
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/MITCHELL%27S+LAWYERS+HUNT+FOR+WITNESSES%3B+Killer+returns+to+court.-a0173857409
Was innocent Mark Kane’s DNA eliminated around the same time as innocent James Falconers, as opposed pre-trial?
-
Did Sandra Lean, or Corinne Mitchell initiate Scott Forbes threats and intimidatory actions towards Mark Kane?
Excerpt from con-artist Sandra Lean’s 1st discredited book No Smoke (p.104)
“More than a year after the guilty verdict, as the defence team were preparing to appeal, the existence of unidentified DNA was once again raised”
2006 - the year warped minded fantasist Scott Forbes went to Scot Caravan’s and met with liar Corinne Mitchell
“Eventually documents were released which clarified the situation - in spite of police claims during the initial investigation that there had been no DNA at the scene which had been unaccounted for, it now emerged that there had always been one DNA sample that remained unidentified.
Just prior to this book going to press, further witness statements, pointing to another, far more credible suspect were passed to the defence. The police claimed that these statements had not been followed up because the case was “closed”.
What statements exactly was con-artist Sandra Lean referring to?
And where is the evidence that these alleged statements ‘had not been followed up because the case was “closed”?
-
Was innocent Mark Kane’s DNA eliminated around the same time as innocent James Falconers, as opposed
Don't know exactly when MK's DNA was eliminated, but, having re-read that BBC piece, the inference is that it was indeed post-trial (like JAMF's was) and not pre-trial as I had initially interpreted.
-
In the 1987 appeal involving the Birmingham Six, some of the many forensic errors began to be uncovered; IIRC critical pages were shown to have been torn out of a laboratory notebook at this time (which fits in nicely with the theme of this thread). However, Lord Lane and the other presiding judges were oblivious.* The six were ultimately exonerated; however, the case was obviously flawed from the beginning. When five of them were first detained, one of them said to the authorities words to the effect, "Can you let our friend Paddy Joe Hill, who went ahead of us, know that we will catch up with him when we can?" Would hardened IRA men have voluntarily given up one of their own?
This case, along with the related cases of the Maguire Seven, the Guildford Four, and Judith Ward, are a national embarrassment. The Lindy Chamberlain case is a national embarrassment. The Todd Willingham case is a national embarrassment...
EDT
*Gareth Peirce wrote, "When the court rejected the appeal, commenting "the longer this hearing has gone on, the more convinced this court has become that the verdict of the jury was correct", the men's expectations of immediate release were in smithereens, but so too was the reputation of British justice."
-
In the 1987 appeal involving the Birmingham Six, some of the many forensic errors began to be uncovered; IIRC critical pages were shown to have been torn out of a laboratory notebook at this time (which fits in nicely with the theme of this thread)
Hardly evidence of innocence
-
When five of them were first detained, one of them said to the authorities words to the effect, "Can you let our friend Paddy Joe Hill, who went ahead of us, know that we will catch up with him when we can?" Would hardened IRA men have voluntarily given up one of their own?
Was that William Power
-
Here is a bit more (see also my edit upthread) from Gareth Peirce, one of the attorneys who helped undo the interlocking wrongful convictions of the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four: "But in the end, it was the simplest of stupidities that concluded the matter. As the members of the serious crime squad had written (and rewritten) their false accounts, indentations on the pages underneath revealed how their books had been altered. Revelations of the efficacy of the forensic test in proving similar fabrications led to the disappearance from police storage in the West Midlands of dozens of potentially problematic notebooks. But for the Birmingham Six, their failed appeal in 1987 had secured for them one unexpected advantage; the notebooks in their case had been retrieved before the appeal, and retained by a separate police force, Devon and Cornwall. And so it finally came about that the six men emerged into the world." (italics mine)
-
And so it finally came about that the six men emerged into the world."
and have yet to prove they were actually, factually innocent ..
-
Paddy Joe Hill
His steak and kidney pie broke allegedly and he got gravy all over his hands - making them greasy
Wonder what his wife and kids ate that day?
-
the Birmingham Six
Why do you think Paddy Joe Hill told the police he’d been on his own at Birmingham train station?
-
Both articles -- from The Sun and Daily Express respectively -- are sensationalist and deliberately vague and ambiguous.
And one of the articles quoted convicted fraudster Euan McIlvride
@)(++(*
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=f00d87a6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7
-
And one of the articles quoted convicted fraudster Euan McIlvride
@)(++(*
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=f00d87a6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7
I seen this mentioned in a article he commented on, similar to what's getting said now.
"A spokesman for the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission said “We reviewed Mr Gilroy’s case and concluded there was no reason to believe there to have been a miscarriage of justice.”
A spokeswoman for COPFS said that while the law states evidence must be retained until a convict is released from custody in England and Wales, there is no such law in Scotland. “David Gilroy was convicted of murder and his appeal and application to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission were unsuccessful. As such there is no legal basis for COPFS to retain the productions relating to this case,” she said."
-
I seen this mentioned in a article he commented on, similar to what's getting said now.
"A spokesman for the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission said “We reviewed Mr Gilroy’s case and concluded there was no reason to believe there to have been a miscarriage of justice.”
A spokeswoman for COPFS said that while the law states evidence must be retained until a convict is released from custody in England and Wales, there is no such law in Scotland. “David Gilroy was convicted of murder and his appeal and application to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission were unsuccessful. As such there is no legal basis for COPFS to retain the productions relating to this case,” she said."
Yep same innocence fraud tactics
-
I do wonder, holding on to everything for so long, long past dates, officers and legal bodies no doubt retiring, taken the time to tie off loose ends of cases marked 'solved' But wouldn't it be just like the thing, of a convicted killer going all out in this smear-campaign, the police, the witnesses, his lawyers, the judges, the PF's, the forensic teams, all attacked and smeared. If they have now thought due to this very smear-campaign by Mitchell, to say enough. Get it signed off and disposed of or returned. Where again his own actions are having the opposite effect. - Just a thought?
-
Sandra Lean
How much more can the Scottish Justice system take?
The Alex Salmond fiasco - the First Minister Nicola Sturgeon misled the committee, the Scottish Government breached its own guidelines,
The Rangers Football Club wrongful prosecutions, about which, Russell Findlay said, "This toxic episode saw innocent men targeted, it has contaminated Scottish justice and there may be more pay outs, yet absolutely no-one has been held to account
The recent Rhys Bonner outcome that police mishandled complaints
The Sheku Bayoh inquiry
Where is the accountability?
Ref: Russell Findlay
👇
Miscarriages of justice charity stripped of lottery funding
“A charity that fights wrongful convictions has had its National Lottery funding stopped and is being probed by the Scottish Government over concerns about how it is run.
The Miscarriage of Justice Organisation - known as MOJO - was awarded £120,000 by the lottery's community fund but the offer has been withdrawn.
A National Lottery Community Fund spokesperson said: "Due to ongoing governance issues, we are unable to provide MOJO with funding at this time. We welcome a further conversation with them once these issues have been addressed.
"The decision to offer the award of £120,000 was made in April 2019. Our formal withdrawal letter was issued this week."
Glasgow-based MOJO was formed by Paddy Hill, one of six men wrongly convicted of the IRA pub bombings in Birmingham in 1975.
MOJO is due to receive £105,000 of taxpayers' money from the Scottish Government this year with at least as much agreed for each of the next two years.
The government's criminal justice division has begun an investigation, with a spokesman saying: "The Scottish Government provides funding to MOJO Scotland to provide support to people who may have suffered a miscarriage of justice.
"Concerns have been raised with us about their governance and management structures, which are currently subject to an investigation."
Hill launched the charity in 2001 and it is run by volunteers and two paid employees. One of them, Paul McLaughlin, is on sick leave. He declined to comment.
Management committee member Colin Grant said: "It's got to the stage now where I think MOJO has possibly gone too far, I think it's possibly imploded so much it may well be beyond salvation.
My understanding is that a charity which is receiving public funds needs to have an independent management committee to oversee how these funds are being used to make sure they are being used properly and at the moment there isn't a functioning management committee there."
Scottish Lib Dem leader Willie Rennie MSP, a MOJO director since 2011, didn't respond to an STV News interview request.
Governance issues arose in April when volunteer and "head of legal" Euan McIlvride attempted to change the charity's constitution.
Management committee members, including company secretary and director Billy McAllister, blocked the move and called for independent legal advice.
McAllister also raised concerns about whether it would be appropriate to offer paid employment to McIlvride due to a previous conviction for embezzlement while working as a solicitor.
Three new directors were appointed - including Hill's partner Tara Babel - and McAllister was voted out while on holiday.
Grant said after the April meeting "all hell broke loose", adding: "Billy, who has been a director of the organisation and secretary, was summarily dismissed without any consultation [and] the co-project manager Paul McLaughlin was effectively demoted.
"The lottery funding which we'd been promised was stopped. The lottery fund decided to not give us any more money because of the problems we were having within the organisation structurally.
"The Scottish Government have now launched an investigation into how MOJO is being run and none of that was communicated to the management committee - we all learned this from outside sources."
McIlvride told STV News McAllister was removed "entirely in compliance with the relevant legislation" and because of "serious failures and misconduct in the exercise of his roles... and for separate misconduct in the form of bullying and intimidation of staff and volunteers in the organisation".
He added: "It is entirely untrue to suggest, as you appear to do, that Mr McAllister was removed as a result of his raising concerns about myself. My entire history was disclosed to MOJO... in advance of my volunteering with the organisation."
McAllister, who denies the allegations, said: "I think they saw me as the main instigator to getting the concerns raised and they went after me. I have been forced out without any due process and I feel bitter about that because I've given seven or eight years of my time for nothing.
"As a famous football manager once said, there's no man bigger than the club and I think I said that to them - the organisation was bigger than any one person.
"I would like MOJO to return to how it was... an open, democratic and accountable structure."
Grant added: "One of the most ironic things about MOJO is that it was set up to try and provide victims of miscarriage of justice with a voice and yet the way it's been behaving with regard to Billy McAllister and Paul McLaughlin shows that it doesn't actually practise what it preaches because it's denied them justice."
Hill also declined to be interviewed but in a statement said McIlvride "made no secret" of his conviction and called him "honest and reliable".
He added: "As far as our clients are concerned, many have expressed their gratitude for all of Mr McIlvride's efforts in helping them and have confidence in the work he is undertaking on their behalf."
McIlvride was convicted of fraud and embezzlement but some charges were later overturned on appeal.
He said: "Given that I spent a period of time in prison as a result of miscarriage of justice, I personally think that my experience is one which enhances my suitability for the role that I exercise with this organisation."
'Giving false hope to people'
A campaigner fighting to overturn a high-profile murder conviction has accused MOJO of betraying potential miscarriages of justice victims.
Dr Sandra Lean said it was "really exciting" when MOJO asked to get involved with Luke Mitchell case two years ago.
Mitchell was jailed for the 2003 murder of Jodi Jones, 14, but continues to protest his innocence.
Lean said: "It was really exciting news. It looked like the case was getting picked up again, it looked like there was going to be some real progress here."
However, last month Mitchell's mother Corinne blasted MOJO for "doing nothing" since taking on her son's case and recovered his case files from their office.
Lean told STV News: "Part of the problem was the promises being made were not being kept. The case review itself was something of a farce. There was no central strategy. There was no planned route to how this review was going to take place.
"The idea of having the Luke Mitchell case, this huge case on their books, was good publicity for them."
The campaigners say that the alleged failings may have harmed Mitchell's case.
Lean added: "I was going to say it's a disaster but if they're not doing the work, they're giving false hope to people and that, in the circumstances these people are in, that it shocking, that is dreadful.
"I believe that some real damage has been done. There are a couple of things that should have been acted on very quickly, that were not and in spite of a number of promptings, a number of questions, a number of attempts to get something done, there just didn't seem to be the will to do what needed doing and some of that now means that routes forward that should have been available may no longer be available."
In response, McIlvride said: "We are aware of the criticism recently levelled at us by Mrs Corrine Mitchell.
"We do not consider it justified, but would not propose to rehearse the arguments in the context of what is, essentially, an unwarranted attack on myself, and, worse, the charity, by parties who are motivated to do us harm."
https://stv.tv/news/west-central/1439054-miscarriages-of-justice-charity-stripped-of-lottery-funding/
‘Four detectives from elite anti-terrorist unit are facing corruption probe over claims of fraud
by Russell Findlay June 2013
‘FOUR detectives who worked for an elite unit which targets terrorists are at the centre of a
corruption probe.
Detective Sergeant John Sallens, 48, and three Major Investigation Team colleagues have been reported to Crown Office prosecutors who will decide if they should stand trial.
The others are constables Geoff Fisher, 48, Michael Neil, 43, and Lynn McConnachie, 42.
All four were based at the MIT office in Glasgow’s high-security Govan police station
Read more: https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/four-detectives-elite-anti-terrorist-unit-1941239
Russell Findlay also wrote and published articles on psychopathic killers Joe Steeel and Thomas Campbell claiming they didn’t commit the crimes https://twitter.com/RussellFindlay1/status/1145689825447763968
Neither convicted killers ever proved their actual, factual innocence!
”Foolish Stuart Dempsey Follow’s Toxic Abuser Michelle Moore & ‘Balls Of Steel’ Scott Forbes..”
👇
http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/11/01/killer-luke-mitchell-foolish-stuart-dempsey-follows-toxic-abuser-michelle-moore-balls-of-steel-scott-forbes-part-113/
Russell Findlay also wrote and published the innocence fraud grift of David Wilson on Margaret McLaughlin’s killer George Beattie (the case/campaign has all the usual hallmarks/red flags)
Why hasn’t Russell Findlay ever called out innocence fraud ?
-
And one of the articles quoted convicted fraudster Euan McIlvride
@)(++(*
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=f00d87a6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7
They are all a bunch of hypocrites too
2019
Miscarriages of justice charity stripped of lottery funding
'Giving false hope to people'
A campaigner fighting to overturn a high-profile murder conviction has accused MOJO of betraying potential miscarriages of justice victims.
Dr Sandra Lean said it was "really exciting" when MOJO asked to get involved with Luke Mitchell case two years ago.
Mitchell was jailed for the 2003 murder of Jodi Jones, 14, but continues to protest his innocence.
Lean said: "It was really exciting news. It looked like the case was getting picked up again, it looked like there was going to be some real progress here."
However, last month Mitchell's mother Corinne blasted MOJO for "doing nothing" since taking on her son's case and recovered his case files from their office.
Lean told STV News: "Part of the problem was the promises being made were not being kept. The case review itself was something of a farce. There was no central strategy. There was no planned route to how this review was going to take place.
"The idea of having the Luke Mitchell case, this huge case on their books, was good publicity for them."
The campaigners say that the alleged failings may have harmed Mitchell's case.
Lean added: "I was going to say it's a disaster but if they're not doing the work, they're giving false hope to people and that, in the circumstances these people are in, that it shocking, that is dreadful.
"I believe that some real damage has been done. There are a couple of things that should have been acted on very quickly, that were not and in spite of a number of promptings, a number of questions, a number of attempts to get something done, there just didn't seem to be the will to do what needed doing and some of that now means that routes forward that should have been available may no longer be available."
In response, McIlvride said: "We are aware of the criticism recently levelled at us by Mrs Corrine Mitchell.
"We do not consider it justified, but would not propose to rehearse the arguments in the context of what is, essentially, an unwarranted attack on myself, and, worse, the charity, by parties who are motivated to do us harm."
https://stv.tv/news/west-central/1439054-miscarriages-of-justice-charity-stripped-of-lottery-funding/
Hoaxer Sandra Lean referred to the ‘review’ mentioned in the above on the blue forum
September 2018
Sandra Lean
That's not a decision for me, Marty - although I'm involved with the review team, I'm not the principal decision-maker.
However, there are discussions underway regarding an online presence for the case and the best way to go about that - I should be able to report back on this within the next couple of weeks.
As soon as I know what's happening, I will post here - Luke's had some really good support on this forum, so it's only right that this should be one of the first places to know about new developments.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg447236.html#msg447236
-
Why do none of these people appear to have ever bothered to attempt to prove Paddy Hill, and the so called Birmingham 6, were actually, factually innocent
McIlvride told STV News McAllister was removed "entirely in compliance with the relevant legislation" and because of "serious failures and misconduct in the exercise of his roles... and for separate misconduct in the form of bullying and intimidation of staff and volunteers in the organisation".
Looks and sounds like all kinds of shenanigans have gone on at MOJO Scotland over the years
https://www.gov.scot/binaries/content/documents/govscot/publications/foi-eir-release/2019/10/foi-201900004799/documents/foi-201900004799---information-released/foi-201900004799---information-released/govscot%3Adocument/foi-201900004799%2B-%2BInformation%2Breleased.pdf
The creepy psychopathic killer of Paula Gilfoyle was photographed in the MOJO offices last year (sat next to Paddy Hill) and it looked like he was talking to/grooming a bunch of female students - who no doubt have no idea about the very real innocence fraud phenomenon or of the fact Eddie Gilfoyoe hasn’t showed an ounce of remorse for his murders of his wife and their unborn baby
https://mojoscotland.org/eddie-gilfoyle-3/
-
I do wonder, holding on to everything for so long, long past dates, officers and legal bodies no doubt retiring, taken the time to tie off loose ends of cases marked 'solved' But wouldn't it be just like the thing, of a convicted killer going all out in this smear-campaign, the police, the witnesses, his lawyers, the judges, the PF's, the forensic teams, all attacked and smeared. If they have now thought due to this very smear-campaign by Mitchell, to say enough. Get it signed off and disposed of or returned. Where again his own actions are having the opposite effect. - Just a thought?
How do you explain the 360 degree change to position by the press?
-
How do you explain the 360 degree change to position by the press?
The media doing their job, reporting anything to sell stories. It is not surprising that you see a positive in this. More of the same is it not? A convicted killer claiming all sorts, fancy that. Not to forget it being fuelled with utter nonsense of course.
"The tide is turning" How many times has that tide been turning, it is this that is on a full 360-degree turn is it not, that number of times it has been on the turn.
These forensics and I have asked the question and do so again, has there been property of Mitchell's destroyed without contacting him?
Let us highlight the legalities once more, shall we. Most of that list could have been signed off and disposed of the minute that guilty verdict came through. From January 2005. Then we move on to that which played a part to do with the case at trial and those 12yrs in Scotland for 'solved' series crime, already well past that threshold. Can you see any "illicit" dealings here bar of course, IF personal property has been disposed of.
So, the knife in a skip, that parka belonging to their friend, even the knife in 2010, all legally able to be signed off and disposed of a long time ago. Yet they have held on to everything for so long, where and again, it is Mitchell's failure in not being able to secure any legal team worth their salt, to do anything, with anything - No one else's.
The further nonsense of anything being "hidden" and as above, held on to long past any legal threshold. And as stated, maybe after all these allowances, there has been a few people p****d off by this smear-campaign, Mitchell evoking actions by his very own ones? - And again, just a thought.
The forensics in this case, the manipulation and those claims. From the off of being botched up, everything bar Mitchell of course, all in order and executed perfectly - Behave. The claim of bias in favour of a police narrative, there was NO police narrative when that team went into those woods and beyond. Nor of every sample taken postmortem by the pathologist. A professional body of experts carrying out their role, in favour of no-one.
But it pays to play dumb to the dumb does it not? Nothing matching any report, all botched, so botched up they had (F) semen. To the point of IB going to print and the same claims. Just not Mitchell's of course, his hair sample, his nails, his clothing, his house, all in perfect order, just everything else wrong - Hook, line and sinker. - Behave.
Not all lost however, there are still those very detailed reports, the further testing by the SCCRC - Hand them over Mr Mitchell, let an actual expert independently study and put out a public report on their findings - It should already have happened of course, intentionally not? Much better to say they were in a mess, to play dumb and put out all sorts around them. Those blind in faith - Such a mess unless it has Luke's name next to it. Bar of course that agreement, dam, think of the positive here, one can keep on claiming there was not a snifter of him found - As if.
-
and have yet to prove they were actually, factually innocent ..
Chris Mullin, Gareth Peirce, John May, and I am sure many others all had some hand in demolishing the various cases. Even by 1987 the forensics had been partially discredited.
-
Have any of LM's family or friends ever been involved in any of his campaigns? It's strange that none of his family, aunts, uncles, cousins etc have not been seen as far as I'm aware. Or what about his school friends that knew him?
Or is it just a collection of online cranks trying to make a name for themselves.
-
Was that William Power
Gerry Hunter.
-
Gerry Hunter.
Lol
-
Part 148 ‘Police Scotland Is Satisfied That No Further Investigation Is Required & Nobody Else Requires To Be Traced In Connection With’ Factually Guilty Killer Luke Mitchell’s Murder & The Killers DNA
👇
https://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/12/05/police-scotland-is-satisfied-that-no-further-investigation-is-required-nobody-else-requires-to-be-traced-in-connection-with-factually-guilty-killer-luke-mitchells-murder-pa/
-
2019
Miscarriages of justice charity stripped of lottery funding
'Giving false hope to people'
A campaigner fighting to overturn a high-profile murder conviction has accused MOJO of betraying potential miscarriages of justice victims.
Dr Sandra Lean said it was "really exciting" when MOJO asked to get involved with Luke Mitchell case two years ago.
Mitchell was jailed for the 2003 murder of Jodi Jones, 14, but continues to protest his innocence.
Lean said: "It was really exciting news. It looked like the case was getting picked up again, it looked like there was going to be some real progress here."
However, last month Mitchell's mother Corinne blasted MOJO for "doing nothing" since taking on her son's case and recovered his case files from their office.
Lean told STV News: "Part of the problem was the promises being made were not being kept. The case review itself was something of a farce. There was no central strategy. There was no planned route to how this review was going to take place.
"The idea of having the Luke Mitchell case, this huge case on their books, was good publicity for them."
The campaigners say that the alleged failings may have harmed Mitchell's case.
Lean added: "I was going to say it's a disaster but if they're not doing the work, they're giving false hope to people and that, in the circumstances these people are in, that it shocking, that is dreadful.
"I believe that some real damage has been done. There are a couple of things that should have been acted on very quickly, that were not and in spite of a number of promptings, a number of questions, a number of attempts to get something done, there just didn't seem to be the will to do what needed doing and some of that now means that routes forward that should have been available may no longer be available."
In response, McIlvride said: "We are aware of the criticism recently levelled at us by Mrs Corrine Mitchell.
"We do not consider it justified, but would not propose to rehearse the arguments in the context of what is, essentially, an unwarranted attack on myself, and, worse, the charity, by parties who are motivated to do us harm."
https://stv.tv/news/west-central/1439054-miscarriages-of-justice-charity-stripped-of-lottery-funding/
They are all a bunch of hypocrites too
2019
Hoaxer Sandra Lean referred to the ‘review’ mentioned in the above on the blue forum
September 2018
Sandra Lean
That's not a decision for me, Marty - although I'm involved with the review team, I'm not the principal decision-maker.
However, there are discussions underway regarding an online presence for the case and the best way to go about that - I should be able to report back on this within the next couple of weeks.
As soon as I know what's happening, I will post here - Luke's had some really good support on this forum, so it's only right that this should be one of the first places to know about new developments.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg447236.html#msg447236
This fraudster even commented on those boxes of case files after they had been with this alleged ‘review team’
That everything had been handed back from MOJO in a terrible state.
-
Miscarriage of justice experts to interview Luke Mitchell in jail
The Scottish Mail on Sunday
By Bob Smyth - 11 Aug 2013
KILLER Luke Mitchell believes he is moving closer to clearing his name after official ‘miscarriage of justice’ investigators asked to come to interview him in jail.
The 25-year-old is serving a life sentence in Shotts Prison for the murder in 2003 of his teenage girlfriend Jodi Jones.
Although he has been in prison since 2005, Mitchell has always protested his innocence and has presented his case to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) in an attempt to overturn his murder conviction.
Now investigators from the justice watchdog have taken the unusual step of asking to meet Mitchell to discuss why he thinks the case against him was unfair.
The SCCRC, which has the power to recommend a new appeal, has so far spent more than a year studying a 300-page dossier on his case.
The commission does not automatically speak to applicants, saying it only does so ‘if necessary’, but has written to Mitchell to say he will be interviewed by it in Shotts next month.
Last night Mitchell’s mother Corinne said: ‘Luke is looking forward to speaking to the commission. He told me he is glad they are putting so much effort into reviewing his case and hopes they can get to the truth to prove his innocence.’
The SCCRC has told Mitchell its committee held a review of his application on the anniversary of its submission last month, deciding it should be continued for further investigation.
The body normally aims to complete investigations within nine months but Mitchell’s supporters say they want the organisation to take as long as it needs.
Mitchell has been behind bars since he was 15 and has continually protested his innocence over the murder of 14-year-old Jodi, who was killed near her home in Dalkeith, Midlothian, in 2003.
The killer, who is serving a minimum of 20 years for the teenager’s murder, has been told he will be allowed to have criminologist Dr Sandra Lean by his side during the SCCRC meeting.
She has spearheaded the campaign to free Mitchell along with his mother Corinne and researched and wrote the bulk of the SCCRC application. Dr Lean said the commission’s correspondence did not detail the areas of the case it wishes to discuss with Mitchell.
She added: ‘We are pleased with this latest development. The commission is the first organisation that has kept Luke appraised of progress in his own case. We don’t have details of exactly what has been reviewed to date. However, we’re confident that the result of the review will be honest, fair and just.
‘When the application was first made, discussions were undertaken about the length of time such a complex case might take. Luke asked me to pass on to the commission that he was not at all concerned about them completing their review within the usual nine-month period.
‘We would all rather know that the review was thorough and that there had been time enough for that to be the case, rather than feeling the SCCRC was under time pressure.
‘The commission also has the opportunity to speak to witnesses who have provided us with fresh information about the case. It would also be welcome if it interviewed police officers, serving and retired, who worked on the murder investigation, as they certainly have some questions to answer.’
http://www.questia.com/library/1G1-339334556/miscarriage-of-justice-experts-to-interview-luke-mitchell
‘Experts’ in ‘miscarriages of justice’
@)(++(*
‘Experts’ in the very real innocence fraud phenomenon grift
And still this guilty and dangerous killer (and charlatan Sandra Lean) couldn’t bring anything of any value to the table
Because their innocence fraud grift was, and is, see through
“We’re confident that the review will be honest, fair and just” ~ Sandra Lean
-
Sandra Lean stated; “There were discussions about possible revisions which would, of necessity, have taken a great deal of time and effort time and effort that I was not capable of devoting to the matter at that time”
‘Revision’s’ Sandra Lean
@)(++(*
-
Have any of LM's family or friends ever been involved in any of his campaigns? It's strange that none of his family, aunts, uncles, cousins etc have not been seen as far as I'm aware. Or what about his school friends that knew him?
Or is it just a collection of online cranks trying to make a name for themselves.
Were any of the Guildford Four or Birmingham Six’s family involved in their innocence campaign?
-
Chris Mullin, Gareth Peirce, John May, and I am sure many others all had some hand in demolishing the various cases. Even by 1987 the forensics had been partially discredited.
Again
Paddy Joseph Hill - who has all the traits of a classic psychopath (have spoken to him) - and the so called ‘Birmingham 6’ have never been able to prove their actual, factual innocence
-
Were any of the Guildford Four or Birmingham Six’s family involved in their innocence campaign?
I honestly don't know if they were or not. The LM case is more recent and local to me. The only thing I know is if my brother, son or friend had been falsely imprisoned for murder, I would certainly be sticking up for them and not leaving it to a self-employed criminologist and failed trainee lawyer.
Shane Mitchell could end this all by speaking out, but not a word of support for his own brother. Why is that?
-
I honestly don't know if they were or not. The LM case is more recent and local to me. The only thing I know is if my brother, son or friend had been falsely imprisoned for murder, I would certainly be sticking up for them and not leaving it to a self-employed criminologist and failed trainee lawyer.
Shane Mitchell could end this all by speaking out, but not a word of support for his own brother. Why is that?
How would that ‘end it all’? Wouldn’t he simply be called a liar all over again? His life was ruined once because of the case, he faced prison for perverting the course of justice. Do you really think it’s strange that he doesn’t want to have his life ruined a second time? What if he said that Luke was in the house when Jodie was being murdered….would you believe him? Of course not so what’s the point of speaking out? Legally it would take the case not a centimetre further forward.
-
https://blog.simplejustice.us/2021/08/09/halkides-bad-forensics-in-the-1970s-british-bombing-cases/
For those wishing to explore what went wrong in the forensic chemistry of the Birmingham Six and related cases, I am providing a link. The problems of these cases, which include suppression of evidence, extend beyond forensics. Whether or not the B6 proved their innocence is, in the final analysis, not the right question.
-
https://blog.simplejustice.us/2021/08/09/halkides-bad-forensics-in-the-1970s-british-bombing-cases/
For those wishing to explore what went wrong in the forensic chemistry of the Birmingham Six and related cases, I am providing a link. The problems of these cases, which include suppression of evidence, extend beyond forensics. Whether or not the B6 proved their innocence is, in the final analysis, not the right question.
‘What went wrong’ is a matter of opinion
-
the Birmingham Six and related cases
All these cases/campaigns have all the hallmarks of the very real innocence fraud phenomenon
👇
https://cain.ulster.ac.uk/events/other/1974/faul76a.htm
👇
https://www.nationalarchives.ie/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2020_17_52.pdf
👇
https://www.nationalarchives.ie/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/2020_17_50.pdf
-
How would that ‘end it all’? Wouldn’t he simply be called a liar all over again? His life was ruined once because of the case, he faced prison for perverting the course of justice. Do you really think it’s strange that he doesn’t want to have his life ruined a second time? What if he said that Luke was in the house when Jodie was being murdered….would you believe him? Of course not so what’s the point of speaking out? Legally it would take the case not a centimetre further forward.
I believe he can't speak out because he knows what happened - just my opinion. If you're running a MOJ campaign then surely having some family members or friends involved would be a huge benefit and the press like that sort of thing, but not one person is involved, just strangers trying to make a name for themselves.
-
I believe he can't speak out because he knows what happened - just my opinion. If you're running a MOJ campaign then surely having some family members or friends involved would be a huge benefit and the press like that sort of thing, but not one person is involved, just strangers trying to make a name for themselves.
Again explain to me how this case is different from many other MOJ where the family of the accused have played little or no visible part in the campaign?
-
So, by your logic, what reason did the Mitchell's have to lie all of them time?
Rusty,
I ask again, why trust the police when they have repeatedly lied and misrepresented the facts of the case? Regarding the Mitchell family, your question is too vague to answer in its present form. Perhaps you could offer a specific instance.
-
Rusty,
I ask again, why trust the police when they have repeatedly lied and misrepresented the facts of the case? Regarding the Mitchell family, your question is too vague to answer in its present form. Perhaps you could offer a specific instance.
It seems like you are here to troll Chris, you have not really offered anything but deflection. If you wish to be hoodwinked by a couple of books, then knock yourself out.
-
It seems like you are here to troll Chris, you have not really offered anything but deflection. If you wish to be hoodwinked by a couple of books, then knock yourself out.
You really are defensive when you opinions are challenged, aren’t you?