"Innocents Betrayed " by Sandra Lean

[Nicholas]

The objective is to highlight factual evidence

Do you mean you are now attempting to solve an already solved murder?

[Nicholas]

The objective is to highlight factual evidence, especially if previously unavailable in the necessary details and  that might significantly help with an informed, judgement call.

What did you make you “informed, judgement call” on previously James Easton?

if previously unavailable

The material contained in the trial transcripts was all put before a jury

[Nicholas]

The objective is to highlight factual evidence, especially if previously unavailable in the necessary details and  that might significantly help with an informed, judgement call.

Hence...

https://lukemitchelltrial.blogspot.com/2023/11/the-value-of-trial-transcripts.html

“As someone with over 20 years of experience in various, detailed, historical research undertakings and often resulting in major new findings, publicised world-wide, I understand the importance of original case evidence” ~ James Easton

 

[Nicholas]

The objective is to highlight factual evidence, especially if previously unavailable in the necessary details and  that might significantly help with an informed, judgement call.

Last post here...

There is way to much peripheral material, which can perhaps be discarded and enable a focus on the critical evidence.

It's not really suitable for in-depth analysis on a generic site, albeit a highly commendable one.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/594743596079701/?ref=share_group_link

You might get some takers once sadistic murderer and sexual deviant Luke Mitchell’s evidence (ie; 22 page written witness statement and transcripts of his police interviews etc) is published

[Nicholas]

“As someone with over 20 years of experience in various, detailed, historical research undertakings and often resulting in major new findings, publicised world-wide, I understand the importance of original case evidence” ~ James Easton

You obviously didn’t pass that on to Ana Justice

Are you aware of her “research” for that fraudster Bob Ruff?

In episodes 1 & 2 of Ruff’s abusive nonsense he claimed the “research” he used was Matt Elliott’s & Ana’s

There were things said about Jodi Jones that had never been said before

Were these Ana’s projections?

The podcasts are still online by the way

[Nicholas]

I did express the following to Sandra Lean and nothing has changed in this respect.

"Thought has since occurred, that I was there with school mates, all of us around 14 years old, at a Black Sabbath concert.
I remember us joining in relentless chanting for the namesake song
Come to the Sabbath
Come to the Sabbath
Come to the Sabbath
Satan's There".

It was of the time, so was a fascination with Aleister Crowley and more than the occasional spliff.

Does your “more than the  occasional spliff” use continue ?

[Nicholas]

In episodes 1 & 2 of Ruff’s abusive nonsense he claimed the “research” he used was Matt Elliott’s & Ana’s

There were things said about Jodi Jones that had never been said before

Were these Ana’s projections?

The podcasts are still online by the way

Ana Justice
@AnaJusticeLM[Name removed]
It appears that he was saying It's not the same knife - that there were two knives found in skips? Really? Noted that the majority of the comment is deflection and personal attack.
11:26 AM · Nov 30, 2023

Ana Justice
@AnaJusticeLM[Name removed]
When someone is abused for sharing facts, something isn't right...
12:51 AM · Nov 30, 2023

Ana Justice
@AnaJusticeLM[Name removed]
You couldn't be further from the truth. We have dedicated years to this campaign. We fought for justice for Luke based on specific facts we weee told - we absolutely have the right  to speak out about the fact some of them weren't correct.
12:50 PM · Nov 29, 2023


What about what has been stated as fact about Jodi Jones?

Where did this come from Ana?

You and Matt Elliott and in turn that innocence fraudster Bob Ruff haven’t shared facts about Jodi Jones either!

[Nicholas]

Ana Justice
@AnaJusticeLM[Name removed]
You couldn't be further from the truth. We have dedicated years to this campaign. We fought for justice for Luke based on specific facts we weee told - we absolutely have the right  to speak out about the fact some of them weren't correct.
12:50 PM · Nov 29, 2023

No Ana

“Facts” you wrongly thought were “facts”

[Nicholas]

Ana Justice
@AnaJusticeLM[Name removed]
It's been stated by Mr Forbes and his followers that these details are trivial - actually, I'm finding that some of the fundamental points that convinced me of the guilt of others, weren't even true. That's not trivial, by any means.
6:21 PM · Nov 27, 2023


Have you emailed Bob Ruff like you did when you helped him with his “research” and told him this too Ana?

[Mr Apples]

Indeed. I've always wanted to watch this trial in its entirety in high definition and with high-resolution audio. Would be interesting to see everyone's body language, micro expressions and so forth. I don't think either, though, is necessary to deduce what exactly SM meant with his comment, "It's not my place to think." It's just an outright absurd response. SM throughout his testimony was, paradoxically, transparent in his ambiguity. Easily sussed out by the fiercely intelligent Turnbull. SM was lost during the trial -- like a mouse in a maze. Poor guy's court time must've been akin to a car crash. I think the laddie has, in fairness, tried to carve out a decent life and career for himself, albeit a VERY late bloomer.

Further still, I think, in addition to having the entire trial to watch on a tv and the full trial transcripts, to really form the most fair and accurate opinion on this case one possibly could, it would also be necessary to have every single detail that went into it. Every single statement, interview transcript ... every single little thing in conjunction with the investigation & case. A considerable undertaking, I know. And the reason I say this, is because on p.2107 of SM's trial transcript (from part 2), DF revealed during SM's police interview on 14.04.04 he said, "He couldnae have been in the house if people had seen him." Now, even without context, this is very damning indeed. Why on earth would he say that??

[Nicholas]

Ana Justice
@AnaJusticeLM[Name removed]
It's been stated by Mr Forbes and his followers that these details are trivial - actually, I'm finding that some of the fundamental points that convinced me of the guilt of others, weren't even true. That's not trivial, by any means.
6:21 PM · Nov 27, 2023


Have you emailed Bob Ruff like you did when you helped him with his “research” and told him this too Ana?

Matthew Elliott
@mattelliottphot
Doesn’t matter who’s doing the transcripts…matter of public record and can’t be ‘changed’
9:36 PM · Nov 29, 2023


Have you emailed Bob Ruff, Matthew Elliott?

[Nicholas]

Ana Justice
@AnaJusticeLM[Name removed]
It's been stated by Mr Forbes and his followers that these details are trivial - actually, I'm finding that some of the fundamental points that convinced me of the guilt of others, weren't even true. That's not trivial, by any means.
6:21 PM · Nov 27, 2023


Have you emailed Bob Ruff like you did when you helped him with his “research” and told him this too Ana?

What about Jodi Jones and her loved ones?

Ana Justice
@AnaJusticeLM[Name removed]
You couldn't be further from the truth. We have dedicated years to this campaign. We fought for justice for Luke based on specific facts we weee told - we absolutely have the right  to speak out about the fact some of them weren't correct.
12:50 PM · Nov 29, 2023


Why didn’t you include Jodi Jones’ name in your tweet Ana?

Was this a Freudian slip perhaps?

[Nicholas]

Matthew Elliott
@mattelliottphot
Doesn’t matter who’s doing the transcripts…matter of public record and can’t be ‘changed’
9:36 PM · Nov 29, 2023

But you and Ana “changed” the narrative Matthew?!

[Nicholas]

Christopher John Halkides
The cyclist first thought he heard a sound like branches moving.  His impression of what he heard changed over time.

What was the evidence heard during the trail regarding Leonard Kelly’s evidence?

And what was the evidence of the witnesses who gave evidence is support of Leonard Kelly’s evidence?

** In Memory Of Leonard Kelly **(Part 179)
👇
http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2023/04/19/in-memory-of-leonard-kelly-part-179/

[Nicholas]

Christopher John Halkides
The cyclist first thought he heard a sound like branches moving.  His impression of what he heard changed over time.

In reality - it wasn’t Leonard Kelly’s “impression” which changed

Leonard Kelly contacted the police as soon as he learned a young girls body had been found near Roan’s Dyke path

But the call handler who took Mr Kelly’s telephone call didn’t appear to flag it as urgent 

As a result of this oversight - there was a delay before the police actually spoke to Leonard Kelly and took his first statement