"Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean

[Nicholas]

Null’s evidence would be have been strong corroboration of the Crown’s contention that Luke was a youth who was fascinated by knives and violence, corroboration that in a circumstantial case like his would have been extremely important, and yet she wasn’t called as a witness. There can only be two reasons for this either; a) the whole story, the attack, the police etc was simply made up or b) Null was not thought to be a credible witness. Who knows which one it was but we have stories of multiple people mentioned in the media, all claiming that they saw Luke using a knife in a violent fashion or were victims of his fascination with knives and violence and yet not one of these people were called to give evidence in court.

Odd that.

Was Kara Van Null’s evidence used to convict the psycho killer Luke Mitchell on possession of a knife or knives in public places, including St David's high school, on occasions between January and June 2003?

[Nicholas]

So, the inference is that there were two separate knife pouches, as well as two separate knives (the missing brown handled one and the black handled one purchased for camping on 13.12.03)? Or was there only one knife pouch (the one with 666 and the Jodi inscription on it) and LM was using it as a pouch for the black handled knife?

According to Craig Dobbie the replacement knife Corinne Mitchell bought her son for Christmas 2003 came with a knife pouch identical to the one found in killer Luke Mitchell bedroom

“We made inquiries and discovered that Mrs Mitchell had bought a knife which came with a pouch identical to this one in December 2003. She said she had bought it for him to go on a camping trip. But why purchase that knife. It seemed bizarre, bearing in mind Jodi had been killed and that her son was a suspect

We started to question whether that knife was a replacement to one he had previously

The clues that snared a murderer - 21st January 2005
https://www.scotsman.com/news/clues-snared-murderer-2470415

[Nicholas]

All those people choosing to ‘support’ sadistic teen killer Luke Mitchell and his gaslighting enablers should be questioning Sandra Lean and Scott Forbes politics regarding dangerous teen offenders like killer Luke Mitchell and rapist Sean Hogg

NEWS: Dalkeith, Midlothian - rapist Sean Hogg

Fury as man, 21, who raped 13-year-old in park walks free as he is deemed too young to be sent to prison and is only made to carry out 270 hours of unpaid work in 'insult' to his victim
👇
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11935437/Fury-man-21-raped-13-year-old-park-walks-free-young-sent-prison.html

[Nicholas]

All those people choosing to ‘support’ sadistic teen killer Luke Mitchell and his gaslighting enablers should be questioning Sandra Lean and Scott Forbes politics regarding dangerous teen offenders like killer Luke Mitchell and rapist Sean Hogg

NEWS: Dalkeith, Midlothian - rapist Sean Hogg

Fury as man, 21, who raped 13-year-old in park walks free as he is deemed too young to be sent to prison and is only made to carry out 270 hours of unpaid work in 'insult' to his victim
👇
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11935437/Fury-man-21-raped-13-year-old-park-walks-free-young-sent-prison.html

This is nonsense

‘Under new court guidance, criminals under the age of 25 are treated more leniently because of their alleged brain immaturity.

See ‘brain overclaim syndrome’ (BOS) by Stephen Morse

[Nicholas]

Ana Azaria
Sharon Indy Sunshine Freddie Gren Matt Elliott Angie Timothy Nicola Brennan Barbara Bacon Sheryl Oribine Rachel Roll

What the jury didn't know

TOXICOLOGY

I've heard a few people say 'but we don't know what the jury were shown, they must have been shown evidence at the trial which led them to believe that Mitchell was guilty. There must have been something we don't know about' (the inference being that the evidence we DO know about is questionable in terms of being enough to convict him, so there must be something we haven't heard, right?).

But we do know what information the jury were given, even the appeal papers detail the points on which the conviction was based, and the evidence on which the the jury were entitled to infer guilt.

What we also now know, is that there was a significant list of facts which were NOT provided to the jury, many of which undermine the evidence they were given.

Jodi and toxicology

It is worth bearing in mind that the defence had a huge amount of information to look through - the task of determining which information was significant, could not have been an easy job, especially considering they had less time than the prosecution to process the information. The purpose of this post is to look at information which was not used, and how it relates to the case. We will never know whether it could have had an effect on the verdict.

An analyst was brought in to the case during the investigation, to determine a ‘window of opportunity’ for Luke to have committed the crime. This information was not known to the defence until around ten years after Luke’s conviction. The analyst did not provide information on windows of opportunity for others relating to the investigation. What the analysis also failed to take in to account, was the fact that toxicology showed the presence of cannabis in Jodi’s blood stream, and that it was ingested less than two hours before she died (bearing in mind that the time of death was never truly ascertained).

None of the witnesses who claimed to see Jodi (AB between 4.49 - 4.54pm, or the two independent witnesses around 5.05pm) said that she was smoking a joint. There was no smoking paraphernalia found on or around her. There was a large amount of cannabis in Jodi’s home that afternoon (a documented fact) but family members denied giving any to her. According to statements from Juj and another family member, there was no smoking of cannabis in the house other than in one room (the other family members room), so it is unlikely that Jodi inhaled enough cannabis in the house for it to show in her system – of which toxicology showed that there was around a joints worth. None of Jodi’s school friends mentioned in statements, seeing her smoking weed at lunch time (which would have been out-with the two hours anyway), and Luke denied giving any cannabis to Jodi for her to take home. People that she smoked with said that she would not have smoked a joint while walking by herself.

If Jodi’s time of leaving home at 4.50pm is to be taken as fact, and AB’s sighting of 4.49 - 4.54pm is to be taken as fact, and the suggested time of death – 5.15pm is to be taken as fact, then that would leave a very short window of time for Jodi to have met someone, smoked a joint and then for the murder to have taken place – bearing in mind that evidence shows that the attack on Jodi did not appear to happen in one spot only and was a prolonged attack. It would have taken Jodi a minimum of 5 minutes to walk from the spot where AB believed she had seen the boy and girl standing, and to then climb the wall and smoke a joint – it would take the time to 5.08pm or thereabouts - leaving just 8 minutes for the entire attack to take place.

But then there is the 5.05pm sighting of Jodi by two independent witnesses – which the jury were totally unaware of - which would have brought the time of death even later than 5.15pm, especially if she had met someone to smoke a joint after leaving the house.

If the two witness sightings of Jodi at around 5.05pm are to be taken as fact (these witnesses mentioned a stocky man following Jodi, and they did not mention Luke with her), and Jodi smoked a joint after this sighting, then she was not murdered at 5.15pm and the murderer could not have been Luke. Luke had an alibi from around 5.15pm when his mother arrived home from work, she said that he had cooked dinner (something he usually did).

At the trial, the prosecution did not mention the toxicology results/smoking of a joint even though the information was available to them

Gill Millington
It's really helpful to have everything laid out so clearly. A fantastic informative post! Thank you.

Angie Timothy
See when i read things put together like this it just makes me question so much especially the timings and the window of opportunity its impossible for it to have been Luke.

Sheryl Oribine
Angie Timothy That's exactly my thoughts too!! xx

 

[Mr Apples]

All those people choosing to ‘support’ sadistic teen killer Luke Mitchell and his gaslighting enablers should be questioning Sandra Lean and Scott Forbes politics regarding dangerous teen offenders like killer Luke Mitchell and rapist Sean Hogg

NEWS: Dalkeith, Midlothian - rapist Sean Hogg

Fury as man, 21, who raped 13-year-old in park walks free as he is deemed too young to be sent to prison and is only made to carry out 270 hours of unpaid work in 'insult' to his victim
👇
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11935437/Fury-man-21-raped-13-year-old-park-walks-free-young-sent-prison.html

Given the victim was only 13 when he was 17, I would have thought some jail time was inevitable -- especially as sex crimes have been such a hot potato since the inception of Mappa in Scotland circa 2007. I guess the guy got lucky because of the combination of the new legislation and the Judge's own personal discretion. I personally am a bit ambivalent about the sentence imposed, because, on the one hand, legally he was not yet an adult at the time of the offence (16-18 is a tricky and complex time for most teenagers, as they make the transition into becoming an adult), and, on the other, it is still rape and there was a 4-year age gap between the accused and victim, as well as him doing it on various occasions over a 3-month period. I'd really need to analyse the case in its entirety for me to give a proper judgement. I don't agree with the SNP guidelines that 25 years of age or younger is too young to go to prison; that should, imo, be reduced to 21 years of age or younger. What I will say is, given this guy's case is all over the media, and he was placed on the sex offenders' register for 3 years to coincide with his probation, you can bet that his life as a free man will not be easy, at least not initially, and very possibly will have to relocate to a different area for his own safety and wellbeing.  And, like I said, the fact that his case was/is all over the media, he may never ever be able to lead a normal life, and I suspect the Judge took this into consideration when he passed sentence. Not everyone deserves a second chance, but this guy does (imo). I think it was wise to put him on the maximum amount of probation Scottish Law allows (3 years), as this is ample time to assess if he'll re-offend or rehabilitate.

[Vertigo Swirl]

Given the victim was only 13 when he was 17, I would have thought some jail time was inevitable -- especially as sex crimes have been such a hot potato since the inception of Mappa in Scotland circa 2007. I guess the guy got lucky because of the combination of the new legislation and the Judge's own personal discretion. I personally am a bit ambivalent about the sentence imposed, because, on the one hand, legally he was not yet an adult at the time of the offence (16-18 is a tricky and complex time for most teenagers, as they make the transition into becoming an adult), and, on the other, it is still rape and there was a 4-year age gap between the accused and victim, as well as him doing it on various occasions over a 3-month period. I'd really need to analyse the case in its entirety for me to give a proper judgement. I don't agree with the SNP guidelines that 25 years of age or younger is too young to go to prison; that should, imo, be reduced to 21 years of age or younger. What I will say is, given this guy's case is all over the media, and he was placed on the sex offenders' register for 3 years to coincide with his probation, you can bet that his life as a free man will not be easy, at least not initially, and very possibly will have to relocate to a different area for his own safety and wellbeing.  And, like I said, the fact that his case was/is all over the media, he may never ever be able to lead a normal life, and I suspect the Judge took this into consideration when he passed sentence. Not everyone deserves a second chance, but this guy does (imo). I think it was wise to put him on the maximum amount of probation Scottish Law allows (3 years), as this is ample time to assess if he'll re-offend or rehabilitate.

The judge might like to have taken into consideration the message it sends to young Scottish men, that rape is not that serious a crime if you’re under 25 and you won’t go to prison for it.  He might also like to consider the message it sends to rape victims who are now even less likely to report these crimes against themselves if they think the judicial system is simply going to make a mockery of their suffering.

[Kenmair]

Ana Azaria

But then there is the 5.05pm sighting of Jodi by two independent witnesses – which the jury were totally unaware of - which would have brought the time of death even later than 5.15pm, especially if she had met someone to smoke a joint after leaving the house.

If the two witness sightings of Jodi at around 5.05pm are to be taken as fact (these witnesses mentioned a stocky man following Jodi, and they did not mention Luke with her), and Jodi smoked a joint after this sighting, then she was not murdered at 5.15pm and the murderer could not have been Luke. Luke had an alibi from around 5.15pm when his mother arrived home from work, she said that he had cooked dinner (something he usually did).

Gill Millington
It's really helpful to have everything laid out so clearly. A fantastic informative post! Thank you.
Angie Timothy
See when i read things put together like this it just makes me question so much especially the timings and the window of opportunity its impossible for it to have been Luke.
Sheryl Oribine
Angie Timothy That's exactly my thoughts too!! xx

 

Who is Ana Azaria? Is she another podcaster?  Are these 2 "facts" left unchallenged, or as it seems does everyone just lap it up.  Do they ever discuss the possibility that all 3 Mitchell's might not have been at home at 5pm and who were the 2 independent witness who saw Jodi at 5.05pm. Surely dynamite for Don Fin QC!

[faithlilly]

Who is Ana Azaria? Is she another podcaster?  Are these 2 "facts" left unchallenged, or as it seems does everyone just lap it up.  Do they ever discuss the possibility that all 3 Mitchell's might not have been at home at 5pm and who were the 2 independent witness who saw Jodi at 5.05pm. Surely dynamite for Don Fin QC!

Those ‘facts’

“ Detective Inspector Tom Martin, one of the officers in the case, said: "This is a significant development for the inquiry team. We now have two independent witnesses who have given us good statements about seeing a young woman who is similar in description to Jodi.

"Both witnesses saw the girl walking in Easthouses Road towards the entrance to the Roman Dyke pathway at around 5pm and both also noticed a man walking closely behind the girl.”

As to all 3 Mitchell’s not being at home at 5pm, why discuss something that there is absolutely no evidence for?

[Nicholas]

All those people choosing to ‘support’ sadistic teen killer Luke Mitchell and his gaslighting enablers should be questioning Sandra Lean and Scott Forbes politics regarding dangerous teen offenders like killer Luke Mitchell and rapist Sean Hogg

Heather Brunt
This Rapist's Face Should Be EVERYWHERE. He Raped A 13 year Old Child, The Judge Said if He Was Over 25 He Would Have Been Given A Custodial Sentence, He Got Community Service
That Poor Girl Has To Live With This
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid02sWub7p9U25M5jyW7wg6H5jbmGRzxzP9dTzcD4NEKDCwmNooKmQcqmVHNjN6tMffgl&id=1012973830

[Nicholas]

All those people choosing to ‘support’ sadistic teen killer Luke Mitchell and his gaslighting enablers should be questioning Sandra Lean and Scott Forbes politics regarding dangerous teen offenders like killer Luke Mitchell and rapist Sean Hogg

Danielle Barclay
@danitoe
Replying to
@judgejules75
Where is the justice in Scotland...there is none. Sickens me... 😒 Wtf 😭
4:37 pm · 3 Apr 2023

Danielle Barclay
@danitoe
Judge Lord Lake needs looked into and fired. There is no justice ⚖️ in Scotland. This is wrong. Wtf.
Quote Tweet
Square profile picture
STV News
@STVNews
3 Apr
A man who was found guilty of raping a 13-year-old girl in a park has walked free from court.
https://news.stv.tv/east-central/man-who-raped-13-year-old-girl-in-midlothian-park-handed-community-payback-order-at-glasgow-high-court…
4:43 pm · 3 Apr 2023
https://twitter.com/danitoe/status/1642915616754368514

[Nicholas]

Danielle Barclay
@danitoe
REVEALED: DNA evidence from body of murdered Jodi Jones was NOT tested!

Vital swabs taken from schoolgirl never forensically tested.

'...then to discover Jodi was covered in this (bodily fluid) which was never been tested....'

 #justiceforjodijones #justiceforlukemitchell
Image
Image
12:10 pm · 26 Mar 2023

 

Danielle Barclay
@danitoe
Replying to
@AuldM
Agree! Once you read and see everything and new disturbing information regarding police and hiding evidence plus Luke being a child at the time....it is just evil and wrong.  I am ashamed of Scotlands 'justice'   sinister police,courts and media plus Jodi's own family lies.
8:26 pm · 2 Apr 2023
https://twitter.com/danitoe/status/1642609369446481922

 

[Mr Apples]

According to Craig Dobbie the replacement knife Corinne Mitchell bought her son for Christmas 2003 came with a knife pouch identical to the one found in killer Luke Mitchell bedroom

“We made inquiries and discovered that Mrs Mitchell had bought a knife which came with a pouch identical to this one in December 2003. She said she had bought it for him to go on a camping trip. But why purchase that knife. It seemed bizarre, bearing in mind Jodi had been killed and that her son was a suspect

We started to question whether that knife was a replacement to one he had previously

The clues that snared a murderer - 21st January 2005
https://www.scotsman.com/news/clues-snared-murderer-2470415

Thanks for that Scotsman link, Nicholas (think I've read it before, but forgot all about it). It clearly highlights that there were 2 identical knives (apart from the handle colours) and  2 identical knife pouches. So, where did the brown-handled knife that many people saw LM with during early 2003 disappear to? More damning circumstantial evidence against LM. There was an entire aircraft hangar of incriminating circumstantial evidence used against LM in court over 42 days. It was no surprise at all that he was convicted. I've read posts on other forums from people who were on the jury at the trial and everyone of them were in no doubt whatsoever about his guilt.

[Nicholas]

Sicko Scott Forbes AKA Auld Mick

Auld Mick
@AuldM
Replying to
@OtleyGerald
100% there is 15 deposits of sperm on the victims body, 2 from her lips were tested but inconclusive, the rest were hidden away and not tested. There is a 'hidden file' with other samples never tested either
7:59 am · 30 Mar 2023
https://twitter.com/AuldM/status/1641334359276781569

 

[Nicholas]

Thanks for that Scotsman link, Nicholas (think I've read it before, but forgot all about it). It clearly highlights that there were 2 identical knives (apart from the handle colours) and  2 identical knife pouches.

It does appear there were two identical knife pouches