What's Significant About LM Finding J J?

[Nicholas]

Read the book.

Innocence fraud pusher Sandra Lean book does not include any witness statements in full

[faithlilly]

Innocence fraud pusher Sandra Lean book does not include any witness statements in full

You have the newspaper reports too.

[Nicholas]

Caroline Heatlie et al all describe Luke being where he said he was and wearing the clothes he said he was wearing.

Carole Heatlie described killer Luke Mitchell with ‘dirty-blond, fairly long hair and wearing dark, baggy clothes in a 'grungy' style

[Nicholas]

If the witnesses were truthful DF wouldn’t have been able to confuse them.

Both witnesses came across as truthful albeit parts of their evidence was influenced by killer Luke Mitchell’s orchestrated and manipulative photo session on the 15th August 2003 in his replacement parka - as it was intended to do

[Nicholas]

Read the book.

You have the newspaper reports too.

Does the book include the full court transcripts of Rosemary Walsh and Lorraine Flemings evidence ?

[faithlilly]

Carole Heatlie described killer Luke Mitchell with ‘dirty-blond, fairly long hair and wearing dark, baggy clothes in a 'grungy' style

Absolutely. Describes Luke’s that night to a t.

[Nicholas]

So Walsh was so convinced that it was Luke she saw that she failed to even contact the police. That she had potentially explosive evidence that could help solve the murder of a 14 year old child and it was a work colleague who informed the police. Do you really believe that?

[18] Lorraine Fleming and Rosemary Walsh identified the appellant as someone whom they had seen at around 1740 to 1745 on the evening of the murder at a gate between the west end of the path and the appellant's house, Miss Fleming suggesting that it appeared that he had been "up to no good".

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

[faithlilly]

Both witnesses came across as truthful albeit parts of their evidence was influenced by killer Luke Mitchell’s orchestrated and manipulative photo session on the 15th August 2003 in his replacement parka - as it was intended to do

Please explain how they were influenced? In what way?

[faithlilly]

[18] Lorraine Fleming and Rosemary Walsh identified the appellant as someone whom they had seen at around 1740 to 1745 on the evening of the murder at a gate between the west end of the path and the appellant's house, Miss Fleming suggesting that it appeared that he had been "up to no good".

https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

How did they ‘identify’ Luke in the first instance? That’s the nub.

[Nicholas]

Absolutely. Describes Luke’s that night to a t.

[49]….the witness Carol Heatlie agreed that she had seen photographs in newspapers and on television of the person whom she claimed to recognise in connection with her evidence, namely the appellant. She had seen the interview conducted on television with the appellant and his mother. It was difficult to say that such influences had not affected the evidence of such a witness.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

What parts of Carol Heatlie’s evidence were influenced by killer Luke Mitchell’s 15th August orchestrated photo session and what parts weren’t?

[Nicholas]

So Walsh was so convinced that it was Luke she saw that she failed to even contact the police. That she had potentially explosive evidence that could help solve the murder of a 14 year old child and it was a work colleague who informed the police. Do you really believe that?

Maybe Rosemary Walsh thought other witnesses had already come forward?

[49] Counsel submitted that, in evaluating this ground of appeal, the court was in the realm of the assessment of risks to the proper administration of justice caused by the publicity which the case had attracted. In that connection he made reference to certain passages of evidence at the trial. At page 544 of the transcript of proceedings for 2 December 2004, in the cross-examination of Rosemary Walsh, there was a passage of significance: the witness agreed that by 15 August 2003 the murder inquiry had been running for some time with no person charged; there was much concern and anxiety in the location of the murder about that circumstance.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

[Nicholas]

How did they ‘identify’ Luke in the first instance? That’s the nub.

His Liam Gallagher/scooby doo hairstyle maybe?

[54] It was accepted by everyone that there had been extensive media coverage of the case, as appeared from paragraph [96] of the trial judge's report. However, the copies of the coverage produced showed that that publicity was of a national character, both in the press and on television. That had an important bearing upon the issue relating to the location of the trial. Furthermore, it ought to be recognised that a substantial part of the publicity which the case had attracted was based upon statements made by or on behalf of the appellant. The fact that some of the publicity had been generated in that way was relevant to the present issue. If some disadvantage was self-inflicted, the appellant could hardly complain of it.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

[Nicholas]

Please explain how they were influenced? In what way?

By killer Luke Mitchell and his lying mother Corinne Mitchell’s orchestrated PR stunts

The exclusion from school publicity

The replacement parka jacket photo shots

The Sky TV interview

The graveyard stunt

His Liam Gallagher/scooby doo hairstyle maybe?

[54] It was accepted by everyone that there had been extensive media coverage of the case, as appeared from paragraph [96] of the trial judge's report. However, the copies of the coverage produced showed that that publicity was of a national character, both in the press and on television. That had an important bearing upon the issue relating to the location of the trial. Furthermore, it ought to be recognised that a substantial part of the publicity which the case had attracted was based upon statements made by or on behalf of the appellant. The fact that some of the publicity had been generated in that way was relevant to the present issue. If some disadvantage was self-inflicted, the appellant could hardly complain of it.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

Although Andrew Holburn - who did NOT know killer Luke Mitchell (contrary to what charlatan Sandra Lean stated in her book) said he hadn’t seen photo’s of psycho killer Luke

[49] Likewise, at page 599 of the same volume, in the cross-examination of Andrew Holburn, the witness agreed that he had taken an interest in what had been reported in newspapers about the matter. He had seen certain photographs of the deceased published, but not of the appellant.

[faithlilly]

[49]….the witness Carol Heatlie agreed that she had seen photographs in newspapers and on television of the person whom she claimed to recognise in connection with her evidence, namely the appellant. She had seen the interview conducted on television with the appellant and his mother. It was difficult to say that such influences had not affected the evidence of such a witness.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

What parts of Carol Heatlie’s evidence were influenced by killer Luke Mitchell’s 15th August orchestrated photo session and what parts weren’t?

Not what he was wearing or she would have described him wearing a parka. How did she know what he was wearing on the 30th of June if she hadn’t seen the clothing?

[faithlilly]

Maybe Rosemary Walsh thought other witnesses had already come forward?

[49] Counsel submitted that, in evaluating this ground of appeal, the court was in the realm of the assessment of risks to the proper administration of justice caused by the publicity which the case had attracted. In that connection he made reference to certain passages of evidence at the trial. At page 544 of the transcript of proceedings for 2 December 2004, in the cross-examination of Rosemary Walsh, there was a passage of significance: the witness agreed that by 15 August 2003 the murder inquiry had been running for some time with no person charged; there was much concern and anxiety in the location of the murder about that circumstance.
https://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/search-judgments/judgment?id=e2988aa6-8980-69d2-b500-ff0000d74aa7

All the more reason to come forward then.