"Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean

[Kenmair]

Can I ask….is any of your information first hand?

Yes, I've said that before but people prefer to believe someone that's written a book based on statements and LM & CM's versions. Sandra will never discuss SM/PM publicly but happy to spend hours discussing the J family.

[faithlilly]

Yes, I've said that before but people prefer to believe someone that's written a book based on statements and LM & CM's versions. Sandra will never discuss SM/PM publicly but happy to spend hours discussing the J family.

Okay. So Dr Lean has been brave enough to reveal her identity so we can decide on the veracity of the information she has made public. Will you do the same? You can DM it to me if you like.

[faithlilly]

The case of Andrew Malkinson. The similarities between this case and Luke Mitchell’s are striking.


https://www.thejusticegap.com/andrew-malkinson-i-am-innocent-finally-i-have-the-chance-to-prove-it/

“ In 2004, Mr Malkinson was convicted by a 10-2 majority jury verdict of the July 2003 rape of a 33-year-old woman in Greater Manchester despite the absence of any forensic evidence linking him to the attack and notable discrepancies with the descriptions provided by eyewitnesses.”

And

“ According to APPEAL, Greater Manchester Police had ‘unlawfully lost or destroyed’ exhibits including items of the victim’s clothing‘ despite the force having a strict legal duty to retain them’. “

And from https://www.thejusticegap.com/forensically-aware-andy-malkinson-case/

“ If this had been an honest prosecution, then the case would have been founded on the forensic science evidence of which, in these circumstances, investigators could have expected a great deal. As it happened, there was none at all.

The Crown Prosecution Service attempted to fill this hole in its case by asserting that Malkinson was ‘forensically aware’.”

These cases seem to follow a pattern.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Not a word about Luke Mitchell on that website.  Why not?

[Vertigo Swirl]

@KenMore - I would strongly recommend that you don’t share ANY personal details with Faithlilly.

[Nicholas]

Geo Dylan
Hi
A wee question that's been bugging me?
I was watching Corry on James English again.
Corrie said that they have had a confession.
I know we can't say who, but why has that person not been brought forward and luke been freed.
Let me guess Legal loop hole.
Thanks guys x

Ana Azaria
Lynette Morrison Someone wrote to Luke's legal team while in prison, confessing to the crime - I'm not sure what that person was in prison for. The other supposed confession was never in writing or logged, so we don't know how true it is/whether it actually happened.


John weren’t you the ‘cop’ Corinne Mitchell referred to during her chat with James English?

Didn’t you also write to psycho killer Luke Mitchell’s legal team?

[faithlilly]

Geo Dylan
Hi
A wee question that's been bugging me?
I was watching Corry on James English again.
Corrie said that they have had a confession.
I know we can't say who, but why has that person not been brought forward and luke been freed.
Let me guess Legal loop hole.
Thanks guys x

Ana Azaria
Lynette Morrison Someone wrote to Luke's legal team while in prison, confessing to the crime - I'm not sure what that person was in prison for. The other supposed confession was never in writing or logged, so we don't know how true it is/whether it actually happened.


John weren’t you the ‘cop’ Corinne Mitchell referred to during her chat with James English?

Didn’t you also write to psycho killer Luke Mitchell’s legal team?

Wasn’t his help spurned? Nothing ignites hatred like a bruised ego.

[Kenmair]

Interesting comment on another forum if DSI Dobbie was given a commendation and gold clock for taking the killer off the streets or did he retire early? Apart from the first few hours mess of not containing the crimescene they had LM sussed and saw through his lies.

[faithlilly]

Interesting comment on another forum if DSI Dobbie was given a commendation and gold clock for taking the killer off the streets or did he retire early? Apart from the first few hours mess of not containing the crimescene they had LM sussed and saw through his lies.

Have you heard of the ‘golden hour’ and how crucial it is to a criminal investigation? Perhaps you should read up on it? Dobbie’s shambolic handling of the crime scene and subsequent attempts at playing catch up fatally damaged the whole investigation into Jodi’s murder.

As to my earlier point about anonymity and how deeply it relates to credibility I don’t blame you for wanting to remain incognito. Revealing your identity in such an emotive discussion can at best bring you unwarranted and unwanted attention, I know I have a stalker myself, and at the worst can be dangerous. It does however weaken any claim to additional knowledge that you make.

 Taking into account the above it does however give you a greater understanding of the courage that Dr Lean has shown in waiving her anonymity in order to fight for a cause she believes in. You may disagree with her opinion but not her fortitude. Naomi Channel, the producer of Over the Wall, reported in her podcast that she has reached out to several of the individuals who believed Luke was guilty and had left comments on the preview of her podcast to speak to her. None replied.

The tables have indeed turned when it’s now easier to publicly speak of a belief in Luke’s innocence than his guilt.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Have you heard of the ‘golden hour’ and how crucial it is to a criminal investigation? Perhaps you should read up on it? Dobbie’s shambolic handling of the crime scene and subsequent attempts at playing catch up fatally damaged the whole investigation into Jodi’s murder.

As to my earlier point about anonymity and how deeply it relates to credibility I don’t blame you for wanting to remain incognito. Revealing your identity in such an emotive discussion can at best bring you unwarranted and unwanted attention, I know I have a stalker myself, and at the worst can be dangerous. It does however weaken any claim to additional knowledge that you make.

 Taking into account the above it does however give you a greater understanding of the courage that Dr Lean has shown in waiving her anonymity in order to fight for a cause she believes in. You may disagree with her opinion but not her fortitude. Naomi Channel, the producer of Over the Wall, reported in her podcast that she has reached out to several of the individuals who believed Luke was guilty and had left comments on the preview of her podcast to speak to her. None replied.

The tables have indeed turned when it’s now easier to publicly speak of a belief in Luke’s innocence than his guilt.

As you go by an alias too I don’t think you’re in any position to lecture KenMore or anyone else about credibility.  Clearly you don’t have the courage nor the conviction of your great mate (or perhaps it’s the thirst for fame and attention that drives her?)

[Bullseye]

Have you heard of the ‘golden hour’ and how crucial it is to a criminal investigation? Perhaps you should read up on it? Dobbie’s shambolic handling of the crime scene and subsequent attempts at playing catch up fatally damaged the whole investigation into Jodi’s murder.

As to my earlier point about anonymity and how deeply it relates to credibility I don’t blame you for wanting to remain incognito. Revealing your identity in such an emotive discussion can at best bring you unwarranted and unwanted attention, I know I have a stalker myself, and at the worst can be dangerous. It does however weaken any claim to additional knowledge that you make.

 Taking into account the above it does however give you a greater understanding of the courage that Dr Lean has shown in waiving her anonymity in order to fight for a cause she believes in. You may disagree with her opinion but not her fortitude. Naomi Channel, the producer of Over the Wall, reported in her podcast that she has reached out to several of the individuals who believed Luke was guilty and had left comments on the preview of her podcast to speak to her. None replied.

The tables have indeed turned when it’s now easier to publicly speak of a belief in Luke’s innocence than his guilt.

I do think this is a good point. People say the stuff on Luke is one sided but it seems nobody from the guilty side seems to wants to discuss this or debate it so things would look one sided. I’d love to have heard from Nicholas, John, parky etc so we had both sides for all to hear. But I think Naomi done a great job of getting most of the facts out there.

Can I ask why nobody from guilty camp wants to discuss with Naomi? Is there any way you guys would discuss this with someone like Naomi? I totally understand the family not wanting to get involved but you guys have been talking about this for years saying luke is clearly guilty, even making up websites dedicated to innocent fraud and spends hours/days on your cause but will not stand up for what you believe like Sandra does. Granted there is no reason for you guys to discuss but then I don’t think you can complain about things being one sided.

[Kenmair]

I do think this is a good point. People say the stuff on Luke is one sided but it seems nobody from the guilty side seems to wants to discuss this or debate it so things would look one sided. I’d love to have heard from Nicholas, John, parky etc so we had both sides for all to hear. But I think Naomi done a great job of getting most of the facts out there.

Can I ask why nobody from guilty camp wants to discuss with Naomi? Is there any way you guys would discuss this with someone like Naomi? I totally understand the family not wanting to get involved but you guys have been talking about this for years saying luke is clearly guilty, even making up websites dedicated to innocent fraud and spends hours/days on your cause but will not stand up for what you believe like Sandra does. Granted there is no reason for you guys to discuss but then I don’t think you can complain about things being one sided.

For my own personal safety I do not wish to publicly engage with LM defenders. I have already been threatened online this year and Forbes seems to have done a recruitment drive at Polmont & Saughton recently with the amount of criminals and ex-criminals they've attracted. Many of the podcast hosts are ex-cons which brings the question of impartiality and a heavy anti-police bias which Lean & Forbes encourage to whip up Luke's Army. As far as I'm aware SL & SF have only appeared on pro-LM podcasts with the host agreeing with them so perhaps that's why it's seen as one-sided.

Secondly, the case is closed, there have been numerous appeals and I don't feel anyone needs to have a public debate to state why they agree with a guilty verdict. Mrs Lean has never engaged with myself in other debates/forums and seems to have a problem with certain questions and shuts them down so not much point in a debate. Truthseeker my backside.

[faithlilly]

For my own personal safety I do not wish to publicly engage with LM defenders. I have already been threatened online this year and Forbes seems to have done a recruitment drive at Polmont & Saughton recently with the amount of criminals and ex-criminals they've attracted. Many of the podcast hosts are ex-cons which brings the question of impartiality and a heavy anti-police bias which Lean & Forbes encourage to whip up Luke's Army. As far as I'm aware SL & SF have only appeared on pro-LM podcasts with the host agreeing with them so perhaps that's why it's seen as one-sided.

Secondly, the case is closed, there have been numerous appeals and I don't feel anyone needs to have a public debate to state why they agree with a guilty verdict. Mrs Lean has never engaged with myself in other debates/forums and seems to have a problem with certain questions and shuts them down so not much point in a debate. Truthseeker my backside.

The interviewer interviewing Forbes on Through a Scottish Prism, is he an ex con or James English? I know the guy on Premeditated Patter is but I can’t think of any others. Perhaps you can? Further the fact that some of the podcasters are ex cons gives them an insight into the workings of the justice system that neither you nor I could ever have? James English admits that when he was first told by Joe Steele that Luke was innocent he didn’t believe it. Was he pro-Luke?

It is interesting that while you say that you don’t wish to debate publicly with anyone who believes in Luke’s innocence due to the danger it may put you in you think nothing of adding to the vicious rhetoric aimed at Dr Lean and thus putting her in further danger. If you’re a man that’s despicable, if you’re a woman unfathomably stupid. Either way it’s hypocrisy of the highest order.

[Kenmair]

The interviewer interviewing Forbes on Through a Scottish Prism, is he an ex con or James English? I know the guy on Premeditated Patter is but I can’t think of any others. Perhaps you can? Further the fact that some of the podcasters are ex cons gives them an insight into the workings of the justice system that neither you nor I could ever have? James English admits that when he was first told by Joe Steele that Luke was innocent he didn’t believe it. Was he pro-Luke?

It is interesting that while you say that you don’t wish to debate publicly with anyone who believes in Luke’s innocence due to the danger it may put you in you think nothing of adding to the vicious rhetoric aimed at Dr Lean and thus putting her in further danger. If you’re a man that’s despicable, if you’re a woman unfathomably stupid. Either way it’s hypocrisy of the highest order.

Less of the personal lecturing please.

Remember you're defending a person who's written a book defending a convicted child killer and another book defending other killers who later confessed. I'm not sure where your "vicious rhetoric" comes from, but blaming an innnocent family for murdering their daughter and implicating numerous others might have something to do with the bad press she might get.

[faithlilly]

Less of the personal lecturing please.

Remember you're defending a person who's written a book defending a convicted child killer and another book defending other killers who later confessed. I'm not sure where your "vicious rhetoric" comes from, but blaming an innnocent family for murdering their daughter and implicating numerous others might have something to do with the bad press she might get.

Apologies but I do so hate hypocrisy.

Is it worth pointing out to you that all victims of wrongful convictions were convicted at one point? Did that make them guilty? Further Luke was a child too when this happened. Let’s all hope that the justice system did indeed get it right in this case because if not it’s unforgivable what was done to an innocent child in our name.

As to Dr Lean defending killers who later confessed, we have the widow of one of those very killers on this very forum and she defended him too. Why isn’t your disapprobation directed at her too?