Why did suspicion fall upon Luke Mitchell?

[Nicholas]

Re: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003
« Reply #2820 on: October 03, 2015, 10:17:AM »
One last point for now - how can the story "add up" when so much of it was never made public? If you pick and choose points, you can stitch them together to make what looks like a compelling narrative, so long a no-one comes along and ruins the story by pointing out all of the"missed out" bits that make a nonsense of it


Word play/power of suggestion, fascinates me.

Sandra Lean
’Quoting information out of context leads to all sorts of misunderstandings, and it's better if people don't do that if they genuinely want to discuss the case factually and accurately.
http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,551.msg331842.html#msg331842

⬇️   

Sandra Lean stated,
‘....it seems Nimmo Smith himself was influenced by media coverage. At sentencing, three weeks after the end of the trial (when the media had had a field day) he said he thought cannabis had made Luke unable to tell the difference between right and wrong (no expert evidence was given about the effects of cannabis)

Lord Nimmo Smith did not refer to ‘right or wrong’ as Sandra Lean stated above he referred to ‘fantasy and reality’

 
Lord Nimmo Smith
"I do not subscribe to the notion that this is a harmless recreational drug
In your case, I think that it may well have contributed to your being unable to make the distinction between fantasy and reality which is essential for normal moral judgments."

[faithlilly]

Indeed, the 3 of them could never get their stories straight. Huge red flag.

In what way didn’t they get their stories straight?

[John]

In what way didn’t they get their stories straight?

Are you for real?  Shane Mitchell's evidence clearly casts doubt on his brother's alibi and that is a hurdle Sandra Lean or any of his supporters will ever surmount. IMHO, this fact alone was the straw that broke the camel's back as far as the jury was concerned.

The open invitation to Shane Mitchell still stands by the way, always assuming he wishes to dispute his reported position and set the record straight once and for all. I'm sure Sandra would relish such an opportunity but I suspect this will never happen for all the reasons previously discussed.

[mrswah]

Are you for real?  Shane Mitchell's evidence clearly casts doubt on his brother's alibi and that is a hurdle Sandra Lean or any of his supporters will ever surmount. IMHO, this fact alone was the straw that broke the camel's back as far as the jury was concerned.

The open invitation to Shane Mitchell still stands by the way, always assuming he wishes to dispute his reported position and set the record straight once and for all. I'm sure Sandra would relish such an opportunity but I suspect this will never happen for all the reasons previously discussed.

After the way Shane was treated, he may want to stay out of it all completely, IMO.  I really dont blame him.

How close were Shane and Luke?  Does anyone know?  There was a big age gap between them, after all.

[Nicholas]

Has Sandra Lean explained yet why Corrine or Shane Mitchell didn’t go out with Luke to look for Jodi Jones?

[Nicholas]

How close were Shane and Luke?  Does anyone know?  There was a big age gap between them, after all.

Not ‘close enough’ for Shane to have gone along with Luke to search for [Name removed]

[Brietta]

I think Luke and Corrine drew attention to themselves by their behaviour around the time of Jodi's funeral and possibly sent any suspicion the police might have already harboured into overdrive.

Their behaviour in posing at Jodi's grave was extraordinary and I for one will never forget the tactile television interview given by the pair.

At that time it wasn't about Luke and appearing to be milking Jodi's death for self publicity as well as going out of their way to push in where they weren't wanted was in bad taste.

[faithlilly]

Are you for real?  Shane Mitchell's evidence clearly casts doubt on his brother's alibi and that is a hurdle Sandra Lean or any of his supporters will ever surmount. IMHO, this fact alone was the straw that broke the camel's back as far as the jury was concerned.

The open invitation to Shane Mitchell still stands by the way, always assuming he wishes to dispute his reported position and set the record straight once and for all. I'm sure Sandra would relish such an opportunity but I suspect this will never happen for all the reasons previously discussed.

Yes I am for real but often wonder if you are? Inviting Shane to post on here. Why would he? You obviously think this forum is more important than it actually is in the real world. He has nothing to say to you, that’s obvious and I can only commend him for his decision.

As to the straw that broke the camel’s back? Not for at least some of the jurors who didn’t vote for a conviction. As some  paint it here, an open goal and the prosecution still couldn’t get all the team onside.

[faithlilly]

Interesting piece from the Telegraph Just found an interesting old report from the Telegraph of the 16 Jul 2003


“Detectives hunting the killer of Jodi Jones have received reports of the first possible sightings of the teenager on the night she died.
Jodi's body was discovered by a wooded path near her home on the outskirts of Dalkeith, Midlothian, 16 days ago. Two independent witnesses have now contacted police about seeing a girl who fits Jodi's description on Monday June 30.
They also told police they saw a man walking closely behind the girl along Easthouses Road towards the entrance to a path where Jodi's body was later found.

One witness told police they had seen the same person a week later on the night of a police reconstruction. Detectives are eager to trace the man, who they say could be a key witness in their investigation.
De Insp Tom Martin, one of the lead 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.
"Interestingly, one of the witnesses believes he then saw the same man again on Monday July 7, one week later, the night of the police reconstruction. If this is the case, we need to trace this person as a matter of urgency as he may have seen something important on the night that Jodi died."

The man who police are keen to trace is white, stocky, 5ft 7in to 5ft 10in tall and appeared to be in his late teens or early 20s. He had short, tidy brown or ginger hair, perhaps curly or wavy on top.
The witnesses said he appeared to be in his late teens or early 20s and was wearing a dark-coloured sweatshirt top, with maybe a hood, and dark trousers, possibly jogging bottoms. He may also have been carrying a backpack on his shoulder.”


The man identified at the reconstruction was traced but he had an alibi. I wonder who this person was because he certainly wasn’t Luke, also he has never come forward...much like the AB couple.

[John]

Yes I am for real but often wonder if you are? Inviting Shane to post on here. Why would he? You obviously think this forum is more important than it actually is in the real world. He has nothing to say to you, that’s obvious and I can only commend him for his decision.

As to the straw that broke the camel’s back? Not for at least some of the jurors who didn’t vote for a conviction. As some  paint it here, an open goal and the prosecution still couldn’t get all the team onside.

That post says it all really.  The truth is there for all but the blinkered to see.

This forum has always been on the side of truth and justice and has been instrumental in exposing many false innocence campaigns going back numerous years. The fact you appear to fear Shane speaking out publicly after all these years is interesting. Could be the best thing he has ever done imo and could very well put an end to the nonsense being promoted on behalf of Luke Mitchell. Is that the real reason you are against it?

[Paranoid Android]

This thing about the police shouting at a 14 year old boy, and surrounding SM's car with many cars and officers:

I'm pretty sure it's a regular tactic to shout at suspects to elicit a response - good cop, bad cop - LM seems to have been able to withstand it as well.

LM has been in jail for years, which is far worse and much more serious than being shouted at by a few police officers.

Also, I imagine any police officer viewing the horrendous sights at the crime scene would be upset and outraged - if you were interviewing a suspect having not long seen that, I think it would be difficult to maintain your composure.

Given the horrific nature of the crime, surrounding the car of a key witness is understandable.

I sometimes think people forget that this was much more than a murder - near decapitation and post mortem mutilation - whoever did this is a maniac.

[faithlilly]

That post says it all really.  The truth is there for all but the blinkered to see.

This forum has always been on the side of truth and justice and has been instrumental in exposing many false innocence campaigns going back numerous years. The fact you appear to fear Shane speaking out publicly after all these years is interesting. Could be the best thing he has ever done imo and could very well put an end to the nonsense being promoted on behalf of Luke Mitchell. Is that the real reason you are against it?

I’m not for it, I’m not against it. What I am against is people being badgered to speak when it is obvious that they don’t want to.

Exposing false innocence campaigns? Which ones? Didn’t you support Simon Hall?

[John]

I’m not for it, I’m not against it. What I am against is people being badgered to speak when it is obvious that they don’t want to.

Exposing false innocence campaigns? Which ones? Didn’t you support Simon Hall?

I investigated it and yes, found it to be yet another false innocence campaign.

As for Shane Mitchell not speaking out, it is clear. If he really thought his brother was innocent he would have joined his campaign to get justice years ago.

Just on that very point, I can well understand Shane Mitchell's misgivings, my own brother to whom you recently referred also had his court testimony twisted and taken out of context by the Scottish media. He at least has set that record straight and has been unequivocal in his support of my own fight for justice.

[John]

This thing about the police shouting at a 14 year old boy, and surrounding SM's car with many cars and officers:

I'm pretty sure it's a regular tactic to shout at suspects to elicit a response - good cop, bad cop - LM seems to have been able to withstand it as well.

LM has been in jail for years, which is far worse and much more serious than being shouted at by a few police officers.

Also, I imagine any police officer viewing the horrendous sights at the crime scene would be upset and outraged - if you were interviewing a suspect having not long seen that, I think it would be difficult to maintain your composure.

Given the horrific nature of the crime, surrounding the car of a key witness is understandable.

I sometimes think people forget that this was much more than a murder - near decapitation and post mortem mutilation - whoever did this is a maniac.

It was indeed a brutal murder, an almost decapitation, a feature of the murder which until very recently has been kept secret from the public for 17 years. Why now is this fact being bandied about do you think?

[Bullseye]

It was indeed a brutal murder, an almost decapitation, a feature of the murder which until very recently has been kept secret from the public for 17 years. Why now is this fact being bandied about do you think?

I read that on a public forum over 10 years ago. I don’t think it’s been kept from the public, maybe just a bit too graphic to go into to much maybe?