"Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean

[faithlilly]

Donald Findlay had been gaslighting John F erris for a considerable period of time. It’s not surprising John made a mistake

It seems there was also an actual knife in the court being used as an exhibit - as well as photographs of knives

’ Advocate-depute Alan Turnbull QC, prosecuting, asked [Name removed] whether he had ever seen Mitchell with a knife.

[Name removed] said he had seen him with 'different knives' on 'many occasions'.

He was shown a knife and pictures of knives, including two silver ones and a lock knife with a brown handle.

[Name removed] identified the ones in photographs as being similar to ones he had seen in Mitchell's possession.
  https://www.thefreelibrary.com/DID+YOU+MURDER+JODI%3F+QC%27s+challenge+to+her+cousin+at+High+Court.-a0125208334

What did John F erris say about the actual knife, as opposed to the photographs of knives?

John [Name removed] admitted, under oath, that he left the bike at the wall.

Can you be gaslit into telling the truth?

[Nicholas]

John [Name removed] admitted, under oath, that he left the bike at the wall.

Can you be gaslit into telling the truth?

At the wall - not a the V in the wall - it was a long wall

[Nicholas]

I think CM said during a podcast that her son LM wasn't keen on jackets and that "you couldn't get him to wear one". More lies.

More gaslighting

[Nicholas]

Did Miss Coutts tell the jury killer Luke Mitchell has threatened her with a knife when she was 11?

It doesn’t appear so because, under oath, she couldn’t lie.

It’s strange that you seem to believe that the most incriminating pieces of testimony and evidence…the photo, the alleged knife attacks on small girls etc all seem to have been missing from what was very intensive reporting. Odd that.

Or was this not reported on due to her age and because reporters were ‘protecting vulnerable participants’
👇
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4192947.stm

‘How does a journalist do the job of letting the public know what is going on, in a case evoking widespread outrage and fear, whilst protecting vulnerable participants and the presumption of innocence?

The law tries to hold the values of open justice, human sensitivity and legitimate public interest in a workable tension

It appears reporters protected ‘vulnerable participants’ like Miss Coutts

There’s no evidence anywhere to suggest she lied

[faithlilly]

Corinne Mitchell had already destroyed her own credibility by denying her killer son Luke Mitchell owned a jacket like the replacement jacket she bought him - 8 days after he had committed his murder.

He didn’t need a new jacket - as can be seen by the photographs of his bedroom

Killer Luke Mitchell owned numerous jackets and the police were only interesting in seizing his dark/green coloured jackets

Numerous credible witnesses, who had all given evidence before Corinne Mitchell, saw her killer son wearing a khaki green coloured army style jacket before he committed his murder and before she had bought him a replacement

I have attended many high profile court cases and if a photograph of the parka, and even better Luke wearing the parka,  was available every witness who was called to testify that they had seen him wear it would have been asked to verify that the parka was the one in the photograph. That you can believe that AB and F/W wouldn’t have been shown ithe photo to verify that it was the jacket that they saw the youth wearing is just ridiculous, especially as AB said that it wasn’t a parka at all.

[faithlilly]

At the wall - not a the V in the wall - it was a long wall

“ The witness agreed that the moped had been stopped at a break in a wall, behind which Jodi’s body was discovered, and that he seemed to be "piling up a rather substantial list of coincidences".

[faithlilly]

The ‘media could report what went on in court’ was said in a pre-trial briefing

Things changed regarding reporting after this

For television reports, this resulted in a continual struggle to describe adequately to the audience images - of photographs, of weapons, of maps - which the people in this public court were seeing; hence the poignant over-use of the home video of Jodi Jones.

The challenge to make television coverage relevant and comprehensible, especially when the evidence was complicated and circumstantial, was at least partly mitigated by the courtroom
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4192947.stm

Where are the photographs of maps?

What maps were shown during the trial?

I don’t recall any reporters referring to any maps!?

What witnesses were asked questions regarding maps?

From your own link it verifies that maps were discussed by reporters.

“ For television reports, this resulted in a continual struggle to describe adequately to the audience images - of photographs, of weapons, of maps”.

A photograph of Luke wearing a parka wasn’t.

[Mr Apples]

I’m not allowing you to distract by getting into the weeds alongside you.

The tattoo evidence wouldn’t have been needed if Turnbull had been able to destroy Corrine’s credibility with the alleged photograph of Luke wearing a parka. It was entered as there was no photograph.

The parka evidence, photo and all, had already sailed and no doubt did a lot of damage to Luke's case, whereas the tattoo parlour evidence was a last-minute thing that was tactical to further undermine CM's honesty and credibility.

[faithlilly]

Or was this not reported on due to her age and because reporters were ‘protecting vulnerable participants’
👇
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4192947.stm

‘How does a journalist do the job of letting the public know what is going on, in a case evoking widespread outrage and fear, whilst protecting vulnerable participants and the presumption of innocence?

The law tries to hold the values of open justice, human sensitivity and legitimate public interest in a workable tension

It appears reporters protected ‘vulnerable participants’ like Miss Coutts

There’s no evidence anywhere to suggest she lied

In what way did the protect her?

“ Ashley Coutts, 15, tells the court that she had seen Mitchell with a knife at his father's house in Livingston.

She explains that the sister of her mother's boyfriend lived with Mitchell's father and that she would sometimes visit them. Ashley is also shown a brown knife and she confirms that it is similar to the one Mitchell had. ”

She would not have been named at all if her identity was being protected.

No mention of an attack though.

[faithlilly]

The parka evidence, photo and all, had already sailed and no doubt did a lot of damage to Luke's case, whereas the tattoo parlour evidence was a last-minute thing that was tactical to further undermine CM's honesty and credibility.

There was no photo. You have been played.

[Mr Apples]

There was no photo. You have been played.

Conjecture on your part, my dear. You weren't at the trial. More importantly, you don't have proof that the aforementioned photo was not shown in court. Theorise away . . .

[faithlilly]

Conjecture on your part, my dear. You weren't at the trial. More importantly, you don't have proof that the aforementioned photo was not shown in court. Theorise away . . .

Proof is in the absence of it ever being mentioned.

Interesting that you’ve never shared the comments you claim were posted.

[Nicholas]

The parka evidence, photo and all, had already sailed and no doubt did a lot of damage to Luke's case

This sounds plausible - like witnesses discussing photographs of maps

What witnesses discussed photographs of maps? I don’t recall any media article naming any of the witnesses discussing maps

I also don’t recall any reporters reporting on the replica wall - which was no doubt used to demonstrate where the various witnesses were

[Nicholas]

There was no photo. You have been played.

Where are the photographs of the maps?

The other knives - two silver ones - and possibly other knives(?)

The photo of Kimberly Thomson

I also don’t recall any media articles discussing torches

When was Corinne Mitchell or Shane Mitchell asked about the torch?

Or prawns ?

I’ve never seen a single article mention Corinne’s alleged prawns

[Mr Apples]

“ The witness agreed that the moped had been stopped at a break in a wall, behind which Jodi’s body was discovered, and that he seemed to be "piling up a rather substantial list of coincidences".

There were several breaks in the wall. Anyway, it was at the wall and near the break, not actually at the break itself. LK said he could hear a motorbike in the distance when he cycled past and heard (most probably) that poor girl being murdered. So, no, they weren't at the wall or at a break when that young girl was being attacked; they were in the vicinity. They went past the RDP heading east to go home after the murder,  so passed the v in the wall and propped the bike at the wall to take a rest as the bike kept cutting out, which was purely coincidental. Crucially, there was no evidence they were at the locus.