Author Topic: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean  (Read 874724 times)

0 Members and 27 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4560 on: November 12, 2023, 10:49:57 PM »
4:45pm-4:50pm (Approx) Shane Mitchell arrived home
4:53pm Shane Mitchell logged into the Internet
5:16om Shane Mitchell logged out of the Internet
6:04pm Shane Mitchell made a telephone call to someone using his mobile
6:20pm Shane Mitchell used his mobile phone to call Gary Coyle’s phone number
6:21pm (Approx) Shane Mitchell left home to drive to Gary Coyle’s house

SIO Craig Dobbie;

“(Luke) Mitchell told police that his mother Corinne and brother Shane were using the stove that night. Corinne said it was not being used and Shane was not able to say either way.

Why not?

So what exactly was Shane Mitchell up to on that evening between 5:16pm and 6:20pm

Who did Shane Mitchell phone at 6:04pm?

Did Shane burn anything in the back garden that evening?

“LUKE Mitchell's brother recoiled in horror yesterday as he was shown gruesome pictures of Jodi Jones's naked and mutilated body.

Shane Mitchell, 23, was confronted with the shocking images in court.

He turned away after being shown the first photo and immediately asked for a break.

Shane sat in the witness box sipping a glass of water and wiping tears from his eyes before he had to look at another four photos.

He then admitted that, when he returned home on the day that Jodi died, he watched porn on his computer because he thought he was alone in the house.

Luke Mitchell, now 16, denies murdering Jodi, and maintains he was in the house when she died.

Shane told the High Court in Edinburgh that, on June 30, 2003, he arrived home at Newbattle Abbey Crescent, Dalkeith, Midlothian, at 4.50pm.

He said he went upstairs to his bedroom and watched porn on the internet.

Advocate depute Alan Turnbull, QC, told Shane he had no desire to humiliate or embarrass him but he wanted to know if he did anything else at that time.

When Shane said he wasn't, Mr Turnbull asked him to look at photos of Jodi's body where it was found near the town's wooded Roan's Dyke path.

As he glanced at the first photo, Mr Turnbull stated: 'I am not surprised to see your reaction. You looked a bit horrified and looked away, didn't you?

Shane replied: 'Yes.' Mr Turnbull added: 'These are not pleasant.The reason I asked you to look at these is so you can appreciate what we are dealing with. Do you understand now?

'Do you appreciate I can't let embarrassment stand in the way of getting to the bottom of this?'

Again, Shane replied: 'Yes.' The witness then admitted he had been engaged in a sex act while watching porn.

He agreed with the prosecutor that he wouldn't have done that if he thought anyone else had been home.

Mr Turnbull asked him: 'On that evening,about4.55pm,who did you think was in the house?'

Shane told him: 'No one at that time.' The advocate depute then asked: 'Did you see Luke when you went down after the internet session?'

The witness told the court:'I genuinely don't remember seeing my brother. He could have been there.'

Shane said his mum arrived home about 5.15pm and he joined her downstairs.

Mr Turnbull read out a police statement from Luke Mitchell in which he said he had tea with his mum before leaving the house at about 5.30pm to wait for Jodi.

His mother was present at the interview and, when police asked if he had eaten with Shane, his brother had asked her: 'Shane wasn't there, was he?'

His mum had intervened: 'No.' Luke had then added: 'Shane was not in when I left.'

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/JODI+PICS+HORROR+OF+MITCHELL%27S+BROTHER%3B+Tears+at+death+trial.-a0126987509

Killer Luke Mitchell did not leave the house at 5:30pm that evening, he had already left around an hour earlier (possibly on his missing push bike) to meet with Jodi Jones

Killers family members can and do lie

Killer Simon Hall’s brother Shaun Hall concocted stories similar to Shane Mitchell

For example, referring to the day his brother had committed his murder Shaun Hall stated to the police;

I remained at home with Leigh and X for the rest of the day and overnight in to Sunday morning, 16th December 2001, when at about 9.30am my father collected me in his company car along with Simon

We three then returned to Capel St Mary to collect my mother, from where we then continued on to Lincolnshire

We all had lunch together with my maternal Grandparents, Raymond and Joyce *******, and my mothers brother Steve, and his wife and daughter, X and X *******.

There were about eight (8) other persons present whose names I cannot recall

After lunch (at a pub, the name of which I do not recall), we went on to my Grandparents’ home, where we remained until about 5pm

My parents Simon and I then travelled back to Suffolk, where they dropped me off at home at about 7.30pm

I recall later that evening, my mother telephoning me on 01473 ****** and telling me that Joan Albert - a friend of hers from Capel St Mary - had been found dead

“I do not recall anything unusual about Simon over that weekend, other than the usual, he had no money


http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/06/12/quite-a-hall-tale-part-12a%ef%b8%8f/

None of the above happened.

Shaun Hall made the whole thing up

His adoptive father Philip Hall had already told the police Shaun Hall had not been with them that Sunday and Shaun Hall’s then girlfriend Leigh had also confirmed Shaun Hall had remained home with her.

There was also no evidence of Lynne Hall having telephoned Shaun Hall that evening.

Why did Corinne Mitchell choose to lie about her son Shane Mitchell being at home that evening?

« Last Edit: November 13, 2023, 12:32:37 AM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4561 on: November 13, 2023, 12:39:36 AM »
Scammer Sandra Lean refers to a question asked by Derek at around 56:05 in the above video

Derek:
I wonder if the jury feel as duped as other members of the public that have changed their views when presented with the hard facts

 *&^^&

Scammer Sandra Lean:
That, that must be very very difficult for any of them who do, because, while we have, while we have, I suppose the liberty to change our mind and to say you know ‘I had that lad guilty for so long’ we don’t have the responsibility of having put him where’s he’s been for the last 17 years and I think for, for jurors that must be one helluva burden, to, to have been on that jury, maybe to have gone with a guilty verdict to now be going ‘I don’t know if that was the right way to go’. It must be awful for them and I think again we, we need to look at the damage that these sorts of cases do to jurors as well because they’ve got to live with the result of what they did on the basis of what they thought was the truth. To find out years later that it wasn’t the truth, or it wasn’t all of the truth, or a lot of it was just made up rubbish

 *&^^&

“Truth will out”
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4562 on: November 13, 2023, 12:43:06 AM »
Scammer Sandra Lean at approx 51:46 during the above video

Lou:
None of it fits or makes sense never mind beyond a reasonable doubt, it’s madness, they all know it and that’s why they have tried to ignore it and won’t release info

Scammer Sandra Lean:
Yeah, Erm It doesn’t make sense eh eh I guess it was never meant to make sense, it, it was cobbled together as a compelling narrative that wasn’t ever really supposed to be picked apart in this way


 *&^^&

What is Derek making of the fact you lied to him Sandra?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4563 on: November 13, 2023, 01:00:51 AM »
Sandra Lean 13th June 2019
In mid 2014, I took a break from the case after 11 years solid involvement. 18 months later, at the beginning of 2016, I became officially involved again and have been ever since. I had continued to work privately on the case during the 18 months "break," just not at the same level or with the same public exposure.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451892.html#msg451892

Wasn’t this when you had a note put through your door telling you that power of attorney had been removed with immediate effect Sandra Lean?

And didn’t you say it was on one of your daughters birthdays that this note was put through your door?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4564 on: November 13, 2023, 01:17:09 AM »
Sandra Lean - 17th June 2019
The guy on the pushbike didn't mention seeing the moped, but they had that guy so harassed, he didn't know if he was coming or going - he actually said on the stand, "They were making me feel like I was a suspect." In terms of the time he cycled up the path, according to police timings, it was between 5pm and 10 past, but that was on the basis of a route they pushed him to agree he'd cycled. Like AB, he told them the routes he normally cycled and that he couldn't be sure which one he cycled that evening, so they chose the one that fitted the timing they needed.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451949.html#msg451949

Leonard Kelly contacted the police at around 10am ish on the 1st July 2003, as soon as he heard the news that a body had been found on Roans Dyke path

The police did not fit the route or the timings of Leonard Kelly’s evidence to suit their theory Sandra

There were other witnesses who gave evidence during the trial which backed up Leonard Kelly’s evidence - as the trial transcripts will eventually demonstrate
« Last Edit: November 13, 2023, 01:20:01 AM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4565 on: November 13, 2023, 01:21:49 AM »
Sandra Lean -
Either [Name removed] or [Name removed] jnr said there was a yellow pushbike against the railings at the back of the school, at the top of the path. The bike (and its owner) were never traced and the bike didn't fit any know descriptions of bikes belonging to anyone connected to the investigation. Was there a bike, or did they just make that up?

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451949.html#msg451949

What happened to killer Luke Mitchell’s other bike Sandra?

And what was said during the trial about this bike?

Sandra Lean
In their earliest statements, JF and GD "volunteered" stories about Luke and various pushbikes. An account attributed to [Name removed] spoke of Luke swapping one bike for another. GD tried to throw Luke and JF under the bus by claiming JF had stolen a bike, and then swapped it with Luke for one of Luke's bikes.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg386893.html#msg386893
« Last Edit: November 13, 2023, 01:26:48 AM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4566 on: November 13, 2023, 01:47:52 AM »
Sandra Lean
Now, there's someone on youtube claiming Luke was still at home, cooking dinner, when he called Alan Ovens at 17.40, meaning he would have to have spent over an hour and a quarter cooking pies in the oven, by which time they'd have been burnt to a crisp!!!
I see this often - a large influx of misleading posting, using known timings but attributing them to other events to cause confusion, changing details from one known event and claiming it belongs to another and so on. I used to try to correct every example - not any more - I'd never have time to do anything else.

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg452006.html#msg452006

Did you mean like fraudster Scott Forbes does Sandra?
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4567 on: November 13, 2023, 02:23:25 AM »
Sandra Lean - 5th April 2019
I was asked if there was anything (other than his mum and brother's testimony) to support Luke's alibi  and I said, "to a degree." The timings of the calls made and received on the landline, when they were both out, support his alibi that he was at home prior to 5.15pm (the police suggested at one point that he hadn't gone home from school at all that day). It also makes the claim that it was Luke who was at the Easthouses end of the path much less credible because of the timing.

The phone line was busy from 4.50 - 5.05 (approx) because when Shane came in from work, he went straight upstairs to use the internet - he didn't see Luke at that point because Luke was in the kitchen. He did see Luke when he came down for his tea at 5.15pm when his mum came in.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451521.html#msg451521

 *&^^&

Zero calls made from the Mitchell’s landline between 4:01pm - 9:57pm (production number 202)

Shane Mitchell couldn’t have went down for food at 5:15pm because internet session didn’t finish until 5:16pm

« Last Edit: November 13, 2023, 08:41:47 AM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4568 on: November 13, 2023, 02:33:27 AM »
Sandra Lean - 5th April 2019
I was asked if there was anything (other than his mum and brother's testimony) to support Luke's alibi  and I said, "to a degree." The timings of the calls made and received on the landline, when they were both out, support his alibi that he was at home prior to 5.15pm (the police suggested at one point that he hadn't gone home from school at all that day). It also makes the claim that it was Luke who was at the Easthouses end of the path much less credible because of the timing.

The phone line was busy from 4.50 - 5.05 (approx) because when Shane came in from work, he went straight upstairs to use the internet - he didn't see Luke at that point because Luke was in the kitchen. He did see Luke when he came down for his tea at 5.15pm when his mum came in.
https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451521.html#msg451521

 *&^^&

Zero calls made from the Mitchell’s landline between 4:01pm - 9:57pm (production number 202)

Shane Mitchell couldn’t have went down for food at 5:15pm nevwusnehiw internet session didn’t finish until 5:16pm

Sandra Lean
3:30 -  school finished
4.15 -  Luke called his mother from the home landline to her work landline (his grandmother answered the call before passing it to Corinne, so there are two witnesses plus the phone logs).
4.25 - call from Shane's mobile to the home landline connected for just over a minute. Neither Luke nor Shane remembered this call initially - it wasn't until the phone logs showed it and Shane remembered he'd stopped at a friend's on the way home from work that they realised the call was Shane letting Luke know he might be late home for dinner.


https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451621.html#msg451621
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4569 on: November 13, 2023, 02:38:56 AM »
”Shane discusses the websites accessed - directly from the transcripts”
👇
https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/websites-and-porn.html?m=1

June 26th, 2019 - Jeremy Bamber Forum
Sandra Lean
And, before the inevitable comments about him "admitting" that he was masturbating, he didn't. I have the court transcripts - it was put to him that he might have been "doing something else" whilst looking at the images ... Shane agreed that he "may have been" - that's it. We now, know, of course, that the "pornographic images" were almost certainly pop-ups, on screen for a few seconds, so he wasn't "watching porn" as has been claimed for all these years".


 *&^^&

Scammer Sandra Lean made the above statement on 6th June 2019 not the 26th

https://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,9986.msg451814.html#msg451814

Sandra Lean - 6th June 2019
Which is exactly why the police refused to accept the statements of the burnt pies. Looking back at the interviews, it's clear that, from the moment the Family Liaison officer stepped foot inside the Mitchell house, she was there to destroy Luke's alibi. She was telling Shane to "picture" things in his head just a few days after the murder - if that's not a blatant attempt to influence recall, I don't know what is. The trauma of the police treatment of Shane (in particular the interrogation on 14th April 2004) would have been enough to break any man - a point DF made very strongly at appeal. His treatment on the stand compounded that trauma - right up to the point where they thrust pictures of Jodi's naked, mutilated body in front of him (without warning) Shane was very clear that he did see Luke that evening, but the police wouldn't accept his statements and kept "putting words in his mouth." After the shock of the photographs, he was forced to carry on giving evidence - any psychologist will tell you that a witness will become extremely manipulable immediately after such a shock because they can't think straight.

It is utterly disgusting that this sort of treatment is allowed. Having caused such shock and distress, the prosecution QC moved straight onto questions about masturbating to pornographic images on the internet - can you imagine trying to make any sense of that in those circumstances? 

And, before the inevitable comments about him "admitting" that he was masturbating, he didn't. I have the court transcripts - it was put to him that he might have been "doing something else" whilst looking at the images ... Shane agreed that he "may have been" - that's it. We now, know, of course, that the "pornographic images" were almost certainly pop-ups, on screen for a few seconds, so he wasn't "watching porn" as has been claimed for all these years.

That said, is it any surprise that Shane just wanted to disappear and have the whole thing go away? It's not about believing Luke to be guilty, it's about self-preservation - Shane's life still had to go on out here after such intense media coverage and such personal trauma and humiliation.


 *&^^&

Shane amd Philip Mitchell have nothing to do with killer Luke Mitchell!
« Last Edit: November 13, 2023, 02:43:46 AM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4570 on: November 13, 2023, 08:49:24 AM »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Vertigo Swirl

"You can't reason with the unreasonable".

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4572 on: November 13, 2023, 11:47:12 AM »
Why have the police wasted time, money and resources on this raging fantasist?

https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/11251280/lynda-spence-colin-coats-dig-argyll/

https://www.lawscot.org.uk/for-the-public/client-protection/reportingconcerns/

Fraudster Scott Forbes has form for inserting himself into police investigations, didn’t they learn after his nonsense regarding killer Luke Mitchell?
« Last Edit: November 13, 2023, 12:13:44 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4573 on: November 13, 2023, 12:40:43 PM »
Lewis Legal Crime &Criminal Defence Investigations
@Michael82986852
1/2. I wrote to LM asking if I could visit him on a legal visit in prison and he was advised  by those "supporting him" to ignore my request.
FBI were asked to profile the killer of [Name removed]. The reply highly unlikely LM. This document never disclosed to a defence or jury.
9:39 PM · Nov 12, 2023

Lewis Legal Crime &Criminal Defence Investigations
@Michael82986852
2/2 That in itself is a gross breach of CPIA 1996 S.3. That alone IS new fresh evidence for an appeal
@CCRC

Because, had a jury read that evidence, their finding of guilt could well have been different.
LM "supporters/advisers, have that on me and put it in the next book. 😡
9:44 PM · Nov 12, 2023

 @)(++(*

catmu 🐱🐈🐈‍⬛🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳
@suzyhal35224037
I don't understand why that would happen 🤨
11:35 PM · Nov 12, 2023

Lewis Legal Crime &Criminal Defence Investigations
@Michael82986852
I've a good idea.
11:43 PM · Nov 12, 2023

Lewis Legal Crime &Criminal Defence Investigations
@Michael82986852
Too many egos. And books to be written.
11:48 PM · Nov 12, 2023


Scammer Michael Thomas Naughton of Lewis Legal & False Allegations Forensics Ltd (FAFL) AKA Ciaran Quinn & Sean Michael Brown
👇
https://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/10/17/michael-naughton-of-lewis-legal-false-allegations-forensics-ltd/

Lewis Legal Crime &Criminal Defence Investigations
@Michael82986852
Theres a small group of people who decide who gets access to Luke.
This shouldn't be about personal gain or glory seeking.
If someone within the industry with a specialist skill offers services probono, then you snatch off their hand off, unless there's a reason why you don't.
10:57 PM · Nov 12, 2023


 @)(++(*

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=OlOJGurmdVM

·
« Last Edit: November 13, 2023, 12:57:13 PM by Nicholas »
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation

Offline Nicholas

Re: "Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean
« Reply #4574 on: November 13, 2023, 12:59:31 PM »
catmu 🐱🐈🐈‍⬛🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳
@suzyhal35224037
Scott Forbes "Anybody whose read this case who is intelligent or from an educated background all know Luke Mitchell did not kill Jodi Jones" 👇
youtube.com
Episode 11 - Scott Forbes
"Decoding the Luke Mitchell Case: Insights from Legal Expert Scott ForbesEmbark on a compelling exploration of the Luke Mitchell case with seasoned legal exp...
12:33 AM · Nov 13, 2023


 @)(++(*

https://www.lawscot.org.uk/for-the-public/client-protection/reportingconcerns/
Who wants to take on this great massive lie?” Writer Martin Preib on the tsunami of innocence fraud sweeping our nation