"Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean

[Nicholas]

From page 177 of Sandra Leans thesis

Another family member highlights what was, to the family, an inexplicable series of events in which what was perceived to be solid, tangible evidence was never followed up;

‘“They took a week to come forward, even though they were relatives [of the victim]... one of them had cut his hair, but they eliminated them from the enquiry within a day – the DNA results weren‟t even back. They never got the clothes they were wearing, or the bike... all of that should have been tested for forensics... just like they didn‟t get the search party‟s clothes...there were so many things we found out later – *** and *** – both of them were at the scene of the crime on the night of the murder, but the police didn‟t trace them, even though they had been told about ***, and they had ***s DNA from the start.‟

(family member, accused convicted, sentenced to 20 years.)

The police never got killer Luke Mitchell’s clothing he was wearing or his other bike 

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean (Excerpts from Feb 2012 dissertation - beginning p.108)
Of particular concern were dishonest claims that I had previously misled individuals whose cases were highlighted in a book I had written, by leading them to believe I was collecting their stories for a PhD study. Because of my concerns about this aspect of the hate campaign, I had retrieved all the written consents of the people whose stories I had previously covered, but realised that to show them to individuals who may have expressed doubts about participation in this study could have been construed as attempts to influence decisions on whether to participate or not, so a decision was taken that should anyone wish to withdraw, on the basis of internet claims, then that decision would be respected without question. No-one who agreed to participate in the semi-structured interview part of the survey asked to be removed, and feedback from those who had seen the internet claims was positive and encouraging, with assurances that most people knew that the claims were dishonest.

From page 261 of Sandra Lean’s thesis

Another Group Two Interviewee explains the frustration and confusion faced by families when judges appear to agree that something has gone wrong, and then use legal technicalities to uphold the conviction:

“They all [appeal judges] agreed that the police behaviour was outrageous ... but somehow it‟s ok because he didn‟t confess to anything. Why does that matter? They still used all that stuff against him at trial – tried to say he was aggressive and cocky, even though they had been goading him for hours – what was he supposed to do? Of course he was going to fight back – he hadn‟t done anything... But the judges seemed to be saying it‟s ok ... just so long as they don‟t confess...it‟s the same as what they did with ***. They said if he‟d been a suspect, the way he was questioned would have been illegal, but because he was a witness, it was ok. How was he a witness when they‟d bloody arrested him, for christ‟s sake?‟

(family member, accused convicted, sentenced to 20 years

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean (Excerpts from Feb 2012 dissertation - beginning p.108)
 Of particular concern were dishonest claims that I had previously misled individuals whose cases were highlighted in a book I had written, by leading them to believe I was collecting their stories for a PhD study. Because of my concerns about this aspect of the hate campaign, I had retrieved all the written consents of the people whose stories I had previously covered, but realised that to show them to individuals who may have expressed doubts about participation in this study could have been construed as attempts to influence decisions on whether to participate or not, so a decision was taken that should anyone wish to withdraw, on the basis of internet claims, then that decision would be respected without question. No-one who agreed to participate in the semi-structured interview part of the survey asked to be removed, and feedback from those who had seen the internet claims was positive and encouraging, with assurances that most people knew that the claims were dishonest.

From page 267 of Sandra Leans thesis

Although Innocence projects are another beacon of hope for the wrongly convicted and their families, and acceptance onto an innocence project is welcomed as a positive development, some individuals have been disappointed by the experience (perhaps because their perceptions or expectations of what an Innocence Project could do were unrealistic to begin with). One family member, for example, was surprised and disappointed to receive a letter stating that no work had been carried out on that case in 12 months, but offering no real explanation as to why such a long period of inactivity had occurred.

A convicted person, considering an opportunity to have his case reviewed by an Innocence Project said

“I‟m quite happy for them to have a look, but I don‟t really have much faith...it‟s a bunch of students – how committed are they really going to be? I‟ve heard from a couple of the guys about students leaving the project, and stuff not getting done, or not getting passed on, paperwork getting lost or missed....you can‟t really hold it against them. I mean, if they‟ve only got to do a term or something to get their marks, it‟s not as if it‟s really important to them, is it?‟

(accused person, convicted, sentenced to 17 years)

Who was this then Sandra Lean?

Killer Simon Hall received a letter from the innocence project very similar to what you state in the above (in your thesis)

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean (Excerpts from Feb 2012 dissertation - beginning p.108)
 Of particular concern were dishonest claims that I had previously misled individuals whose cases were highlighted in a book I had written, by leading them to believe I was collecting their stories for a PhD study. Because of my concerns about this aspect of the hate campaign, I had retrieved all the written consents of the people whose stories I had previously covered, but realised that to show them to individuals who may have expressed doubts about participation in this study could have been construed as attempts to influence decisions on whether to participate or not, so a decision was taken that should anyone wish to withdraw, on the basis of internet claims, then that decision would be respected without question. No-one who agreed to participate in the semi-structured interview part of the survey asked to be removed, and feedback from those who had seen the internet claims was positive and encouraging, with assurances that most people knew that the claims were dishonest.

2007/08 - Stephen T Manning back cover of 1st discredited book No Smoke - which is referenced throughout
Sandra Lean’s thesis

“The author is currently a PhD candidate in criminal justice at Stirling university

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean (Excerpts from Feb 2012 dissertation - beginning p.108)
Because of my long term involvement in a high profile case in Scotland, in which an extremely negative perception of the convicted person has existed for several years

Because of developments in the above case (with which I remained involved throughout the duration of the study), an internet “hate campaign‟ emerged aiming to discredit me, personally, and the case in particular. Many lies were posted on several sites, calling my integrity and trustworthiness into question, which may have had some impact on those who had initially expressed an interest in participating in the study failing to respond to later attempts at contact. As a result of these events, and the unregulated manner in which sites were operated, the lies and malicious comments escalated fairly quickly into threats, both veiled and blatant.[/b].

What nonsense

Sandra Lean started dating unconvicted baby killer Billy Middelton in 2010

[Nicholas]

Angeline Aka Sandra Lean - 28th February 2010

“Also, in a break following Janine's testimony, Luke complained to one of his legal team that Janine was lying, and was not being challenged. The response (remember, this is from his own team)

[Nicholas]

Corinne Mitchell - 26th March 2010

“There was a murder in Dalkeith. L&B had many people coming forward to give them information ( I know because they have come and told me) and what do they do?.......tell them to go away!!!!! then arrest a 14yr old boy.

‘There was a murder in Dalkeith’ 

Who was Corinne Mitchell referring to about allegedly being told to ‘go away’ - fantasist Scott Forbes

[Nicholas]

Corinne Mitchell - 8th April 2010

“Also, you cannot imagine our disbelief when findlay dropped falconer and kane at the appeal. We certainly did not see THAT one coming. But like I said before findlay did not share things with us mere mortals!!!!

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean (Excerpts from Feb 2012 dissertation - beginning p.108)
Of particular concern were dishonest claims that I had previously misled individuals whose cases were highlighted in a book I had written, by leading them to believe I was collecting their stories for a PhD study. Because of my concerns about this aspect of the hate campaign, I had retrieved all the written consents of the people whose stories I had previously covered, but realised that to show them to individuals who may have expressed doubts about participation in this study could have been construed as attempts to influence decisions on whether to participate or not, so a decision was taken that should anyone wish to withdraw, on the basis of internet claims, then that decision would be respected without question. No-one who agreed to participate in the semi-structured interview part of the survey asked to be removed, and feedback from those who had seen the internet claims was positive and encouraging, with assurances that most people knew that the claims were dishonest.

Corinne Mitchell - 9th April 2010

“oh dear! You have no intentions of reading "No Smoke"........what is your problem with Sandra Lean....every single one of your posts slate her.
She didn't write a novel....Everything in the book is from documents,statements, court hearings etc.etc. Lets be honest here big wullie.....your just miffed because you're not in it.


It wasn’t though was it Sandra Lean

More lies from Corinne Mitchell

[Nicholas]

And yet more lies from Corinne Mitchell

9th April 2010

"No smoke"....well I'm not reading the same reviews as you then!The reviews I read were excellent and complimentary. It also comes recommended by the c.c.r.c.!......cant get much higher than that then!


“Sandra received an e~mail from a female saying the c.c.r.c. had recommended her book and could she get a copy.
Phone them.......don,t phone them......why are you making it such a mission. Why does this affect you both that much.???????


9th April 2010
“The answer to your question is no, the Commission does not recommend this book to its applicants.

Justin Hawkins
Head of Communication
Criminal Cases Review Commission


Corinne Mitchell - 9th April 2010

“...................maybe it was the Sccrc..........whatever! did you not read the post from checkpoint press.....LET IT GO!

[Nicholas]

From page 177 of Sandra Leans thesis

Another family member highlights what was, to the family, an inexplicable series of events in which what was perceived to be solid, tangible evidence was never followed up;

‘“They took a week to come forward, even though they were relatives [of the victim]... one of them had cut his hair, but they eliminated them from the enquiry within a day – the DNA results weren‟t even back. They never got the clothes they were wearing, or the bike... all of that should have been tested for forensics... just like they didn‟t get the search party‟s clothes...there were so many things we found out later – *** and *** – both of them were at the scene of the crime on the night of the murder, but the police didn‟t trace them, even though they had been told about ***, and they had ***s DNA from the start.‟

(family member, accused convicted, sentenced to 20 years.)

Liar Sandra Lean - 10th April 2010

“…furthermore cases which have been featured in the book cannot be used for the PhD”
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/shirleymckie/luke-mitchell-postings-now-archived-see-new-thread-t398-s290.html

[Nicholas]

From page 177 of Sandra Leans thesis

Another family member highlights what was, to the family, an inexplicable series of events in which what was perceived to be solid, tangible evidence was never followed up;

‘“They took a week to come forward, even though they were relatives [of the victim]... one of them had cut his hair, but they eliminated them from the enquiry within a day – the DNA results weren‟t even back. They never got the clothes they were wearing, or the bike... all of that should have been tested for forensics... just like they didn‟t get the search party‟s clothes...there were so many things we found out later – *** and *** – both of them were at the scene of the crime on the night of the murder, but the police didn‟t trace them, even though they had been told about ***, and they had ***s DNA from the start.‟

(family member, accused convicted, sentenced to 20 years.)

Sandra Lean

“Interviews for the PhD must be kept anonymous, and are a completely separate issue from any books. This is made absolutely clear to anyone who is participating in the research. Furthermore, cases which have been featured in the book cannot be used for the PhD. Again, documented evidence is available .

 

[Nicholas]

2007/08 - Stephen T Manning back cover of 1st discredited book No Smoke - which is referenced throughout
Sandra Lean’s thesis

“The author is currently a PhD candidate in criminal justice at Stirling university

2007 and 2008 ‘No Smoke’ published claiming Sandra Lean was a ‘PhD candidate’

A PhD candidate is someone who has completed all of the required coursework and has successfully passed their qualifying exams

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean (Excerpts from Feb 2012 dissertation - beginning p.108)
Because of developments in the above case (with which I remained involved throughout the duration of the study), an internet “hate campaign‟ emerged aiming to discredit me, personally, and the case in particular. Many lies were posted on several sites, calling my integrity and trustworthiness into question,

 

In reality - many of the Mitchell’s lies, along with the lies Sandra Lean was repeating and the stories Sandra Lean was concocting, were being exposed

What ‘developments’ was Sandra Lean referring to?

There were no ‘developments’!

Sandra Lean was being caught out, as was the innocence fraud

Sandra Lean - April 2010

Teasing the Animals This phrase was lightheartedly used by me twice in private emails
https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/shirleymckie/luke-mitchell-postings-now-archived-see-new-thread-t398-s290.html

Sandra Lean
@SandraLean5
You know you're rattling cages when people resort to personal attacks and lies. Gives me a warm glow!!!!
8:06 PM · Jun 3, 2019
https://twitter.com/SandraLean5/status/1135623855916158977

Sandra Lean (Excerpts from Feb 2012 dissertation - Page 104)
Again, given the manner in which the study was conducted (travelling in a camper van to keep costs down)

In 2010 Sandra Lean and unconvicted baby killer Billy Middleton travelled from Scotland to England in an old red post office van, NOT a ‘camper van’!

The old red post office van had had the seats ripped out of the back of it and a make shift seating/bed area was put in place of the post office seats

Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton had a twisted reciprocal relationship

After being assaulted by Billy Middleton (Nov 2010) and finding him in a street in Edinburgh somewhere ‘covered in blood’ Sandra Lean and her youngest adult daughter apparently gave Billy Middleton money for him to travel back to Shetland

And after Sandra Lean and Billy Middleton’s romantic relationship came to an end and after the incident(s) in Dalkeith/Edinburgh Sandra Lean entered into a partnership with Billy Middleton and the WAP ‘org’

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean

“Interviews for the PhD must be kept anonymous, and are a completely separate issue from any books. This is made absolutely clear to anyone who is participating in the research. Furthermore, cases which have been featured in the book cannot be used for the PhD. Again, documented evidence is available .

 

What exactly does this ‘documented evidence’ state ?