What's Significant About LM Finding J J?

[Nicholas]

Mr Turnbull: 'Isn't it nearer the truth to say you would be prepared to lie to cover up to protect him?'

Corinne Mitchell: 'That's not true.'


It was true

[Kenmair]

Yet again your curiosity only extends to the Mitchell family. Where were F/D when there bike was spotted at the wall? Where was [Name removed] when his mother said that he ‘called out’ but he said he’d slept all night? When he said he’d had dinner with Jodi yet his mum said he’d had it in his room? Go on….let your curiosity wander.

This has been proved over and over that no one spotted any moped at that wall. It wasn't possible from where the witness claimed on The Beeches.

[Nicholas]

Liar Corinne Mitchell’s text message wasn’t sent until gone midnight

“You will tell me right now what is wrong”

And what gave Corinne Mitchell the impression something was wrong?

Was it her killer son getting home and suddenly going back out again with Mia

Or was it the fire in the garden

Or a combination of the two?

Or something else?

[faithlilly]

This has been proved over and over that no one spotted any moped at that wall. It wasn't possible from where the witness claimed on The Beeches.

So how do you explain [Name removed] agreeing with DF, under oath, that the bike was at the wall? Have you started second guessing witnesses?

[faithlilly]

The Mitchells repeatedly handed over false accounts to the police - There is nothing placing LM home at 10:50pm and everything to show us that his mother knew nothing at this point of speaking with JuJ's, nor of any claim of making ones way to Easthouses. Within no time she is frantically trying to get a hold of him but makes no attempt to get him at the place he claimed to be heading to, which as most know was yet another false account.

Claiming to be on that path at 11pm, still not at the top by 11:20pm. LM just kept on given one set of false accounts into the next. We apply reality here yet again, within 20mins of telling Jodi's mother he had not seen her he claims to be upon that path, within 10mins of telling her, he instantly initiated an actual search to that path, nowhere else until upon it.

No mother or brother to go with the lad she claimed she was worried about on a "secluded path" which again ties in with LM not being home at 10:50pm.

The police contacted, and as has been shown, Jodi's mother was without doubt frantic, her own mother trying to calm her down over the phone, she is awaiting the arrival of the police with what should be in place, support around her at that awful time. She had her son and partner - No one with LM, which again shows that he was not leaving from home at 10:50pm, or that SM was certainly not home, nor a mother who was worried at all about her son going out at that time --- ALONE.

Rapid is the only way to describe what took place fully led by LM. Had not seen her, didn't turn up, I will go to the path to search, information related to AW and three people head to the path, whilst the police are expected at Jodi's house any minute. And again, the only reason that physical search is in place at all so rapidly, to that path is by LM's actions."

It is 11:18pm and the last contact to a mobile prior to the arrival of the police, prior to the four meeting is made, by this time LM by his claims has been on that path 18mins alone with his dog. The time is now 11:20pm, the police are in Jodi's house, the searchers see each others torchlight from the top of the path. "Is that you Luke?" and walk down to be in his company, he was only around 2/3 in what was now over 20mins, around 22mins by the time of being together. He had told Jodi's mother he had his dog, expecting something to be brought and he asks just that.

The time around 11:24pm and they set off together, LM is now in on that path for around 24mins, the police in attendance for around 5mins writing down those details. LM wades through several feet of undergrowth to the wall at the Gino break, he said he "just had a hunch, a gut instinct" that something was behind the wall, and indeed directly behind the wall is where he shone his torch.

We are now approaching 11:30pm, the police in attendance for around 10mins and the four are at the V break in the wall, LM enters the woods, and around 10-20secs he is shouting out he has found something. 4mins later, the police in attendance around 15mins, and a call comes through a body has been found - No need for any big organised search to be put in place, for any others to join in with. LM in a total time scale of less than one hour had placed her missing and found her ---------- Hidden some 43ft west of that break in the wall, in and around 6mins, in mere seconds of entering that dark woodland alone, with nothing other than special knowledge of knowing exactly where to go, rapidly.

He gave further false account, told the police is was his dog, told the police "they" had been around 60ft past, narrowed down to exactly 43ft. That only he with AW were at the V break in the wall, that JaJ's with SK had kept on walking down from that 60ft to 43ft point. - Those first accounts chalk and cheese, which showed clearly everything took place at the V, the dog a red herring, it had nothing at all to do with LM knowing exactly where to go - Realism is placing multiple ? around the multiple false accounts handed over by him, his mother and his brother.

The obtuse questions to deflect away from that stark reality - There had been no big organized search in place, there was no time, a series of events, of missing, path, wall, woods and bang. Before that missing persons report had been put in place, taken place rapidly whilst a family were seeking help from the police. LM was off like a shot in control before the police took control - Fact. None of this can be changed ever, one cannot alter time, they cannot alter the many factors that backed what took place to a hilt. And you sure as hell cannot erase out every single false account handed over by LM, ever. Then we add every piece of damning circumstantial evidence together, piecing that jigsaw together. Whilst children having tantrums continuously attempt to scatter the pieces because they do not like the picture ------

LM wasn’t home at 10.50? One question….when did he collect Mia if he didn’t go home?

Where else was Luke supposed to Luke before the path? He was making his way to Judith’s house, looking out for Jodi on the way. What else was he supposed to do?

Again when did he collect Mia if he didn’t go home?

MIA WAS WITH HIM…he was not alone. Are you okay Parky?

It’s the Jones search team who have questions hanging over the veracity of the accounts they gave in court. Of course we now know how their statements changed over the months…the BBC showcased them in case anyone was in any doubt that they changed. When asked in court why they went to the path to the exclusion of everywhere else AW said “I just did”. Nothing of going to meet Luke in her testimony…”I just did”. Jodi’s gran determined to take the search party down RDP, back where Luke had just been and saw nothing and irrespective of Luke telling Judith that he would make his way to hers. Luke wasn’t the one driving the search and if he had had his way he would never have been searching the path again.

[Kenmair]

So how do you explain [Name removed] agreeing with DF, under oath, that the bike was at the wall? Have you started second guessing witnesses?

I haven't disputed that. I was stating the moped was not witnessed at the V break at 5.15pm by a toolhire worker or anyone else, either on the path or from The Beeches. I think it was yourself that second guessed that although it may be from SL's book it originates from which might explain the lack of clarity and how it ever came to be that someone witnessed something they didn't.

[faithlilly]

I haven't disputed that. I was stating the moped was not witnessed at the V break at 5.15pm by a toolhire worker or anyone else, either on the path or from The Beeches. I think it was yourself that second guessed that although it may be from SL's book it originates from which might explain the lack of clarity and how it ever came to be that someone witnessed something they didn't.

I’m not getting into an irrelevant debate about the source of the information that the bike was at the wall at the same time as Jodi was allegedly being murdered behind it. It was and both of the individuals riding it were not. That’s the point, surely?

[Parky41]

I haven't disputed that. I was stating the moped was not witnessed at the V break at 5.15pm by a toolhire worker or anyone else, either on the path or from The Beeches. I think it was yourself that second guessed that although it may be from SL's book it originates from which might explain the lack of clarity and how it ever came to be that someone witnessed something they didn't.

The only point is the lies and that is the only thing that counts, on repeat. Saying something known to be impossible to use as a weapon to beat people with continuously. No viewpoint, two bikes upon that path, one we know was stationary, and perhaps in view up from the V break, a person said they saw a bike "close to---"

Now let us analyse whether there is any feasibility in seeing LM, IF they had entered that woodland briefly. First we apply times on the path, from around 15-20mins max, both paths and home. We know they entered after LK, we know he stopped at approx 5:15pm, and as above. We know they could not possibly have entered that path until after 5:10pm, in BTH after close of day, time to push out and up that hill, yada, yada, yada.

Cause to enter that woodland, if we apply they were, just to show the ludicrous in it all. They would have had to enter and for whatever reason with no sense, rapidly make their way down that narrow passage quite a distance until there would be any visibility, see horror and make their way back, up and over the break, think nothing of it and have a few plays on the bike, riding it up and down and home - Witnessed. Whilst it might make sense to have everyone as unresponsive as LM, it is not what actually happens in reality.

Which, when investigated thoroughly had them eliminated as suspect. The real times, the facts of being heard riding that bike, witnessed being home. Nothing of them in those woods of course and on it goes - The absolute fact, that IF they had entered that woodland, there was no viewpoint to where LM was with Jodi Jones, as above, having to make their way down at least 30ft, and this is in daylight.

We go to the search in the dark, we have someone who's dog had alerted to nothing past that break, that red herring, that false account by LM. Up and over and around 10steps and stop. Reciting what he could not see at all and we are back to that special knowledge.

It is such a mess of muddled up disinformation, that one of the most avid supporters just now has LM being examined at 11pm, another saying he was with the boys in woods at 6.30pm, support built upon sifting sand where most know very little of that actual case of LM V HMA.

Hopefully the FOI act will have it sooner than later, that people can see the actual case, the evidence, and decide from this rather than a false narrative based upon self interest of others, in a giant melting of crazed up conspiracy theories.

No bike nor riderless was seen at any V break in the wall, admitting to be stopped, and again, the only thing that counts of repeat are the lies, the wilful manipulation to deflect from LM, it doesn't, it has at it always had, was three people upon that path whilst LM was with Jodi in the woods. There is nothing that has ever been showing to  disprove this, quite the opposite. We can already apply the noise of that bike heard and the boys voices by someone who knew them?

[faithlilly]

The only point is the lies and that is the only thing that counts, on repeat. Saying something known to be impossible to use as a weapon to beat people with continuously. No viewpoint, two bikes upon that path, one we know was stationary, and perhaps in view up from the V break, a person said they saw a bike "close to---"

Now let us analyse whether there is any feasibility in seeing LM, IF they had entered that woodland briefly. First we apply times on the path, from around 15-20mins max, both paths and home. We know they entered after LK, we know he stopped at approx 5:15pm, and as above. We know they could not possibly have entered that path until after 5:10pm, in BTH after close of day, time to push out and up that hill, yada, yada, yada.

Cause to enter that woodland, if we apply they were, just to show the ludicrous in it all. They would have had to enter and for whatever reason with no sense, rapidly make their way down that narrow passage quite a distance until there would be any visibility, see horror and make their way back, up and over the break, think nothing of it and have a few plays on the bike, riding it up and down and home - Witnessed. Whilst it might make sense to have everyone as unresponsive as LM, it is not what actually happens in reality.

Which, when investigated thoroughly had them eliminated as suspect. The real times, the facts of being heard riding that bike, witnessed being home. Nothing of them in those woods of course and on it goes - The absolute fact, that IF they had entered that woodland, there was no viewpoint to where LM was with Jodi Jones, as above, having to make their way down at least 30ft, and this is in daylight.

We go to the search in the dark, we have someone who's dog had alerted to nothing past that break, that red herring, that false account by LM. Up and over and around 10steps and stop. Reciting what he could not see at all and we are back to that special knowledge.

It is such a mess of muddled up disinformation, that one of the most avid supporters just now has LM being examined at 11pm, another saying he was with the boys in woods at 6.30pm, support built upon sifting sand where most know very little of that actual case of LM V HMA.

Hopefully the FOI act will have it sooner than later, that people can see the actual case, the evidence, and decide from this rather than a false narrative based upon self interest of others, in a giant melting of crazed up conspiracy theories.

No bike nor riderless was seen at any V break in the wall, admitting to be stopped, and again, the only thing that counts of repeat are the lies, the wilful manipulation to deflect from LM, it doesn't, it has at it always had, was three people upon that path whilst LM was with Jodi in the woods. There is nothing that has ever been showing to  disprove this, quite the opposite. We can already apply the noise of that bike heard and the boys voices by someone who knew them?

And on and on it goes, misinformation upon misinformation, professing to have knowledge that one is not privy to. Making it up as you go along… a tangle of fact and fiction, knotted together so tightly it’s impossible to see where one begins and the other ends. “Luke was not at home at 10.50 and yet he had Mia. The boys met Luke in the Abbey at 7.30 when the boys themselves said it was 7.00. You are preaching to the converted…and you know it. You are quickly becoming an irrelevant echo chamber of fringe opinions but crack on.

The moped boys in court, on oath, said that they couldn’t remember where they where when the bike was parked against the fence and if they couldn’t remember…..well you know the rest.

[Nicholas]

Hopefully the FOI act will have it sooner than later

Sandra Lean could have and should have published killer Luke Mitchell’s 22 page witness statement years ago 

Sandra Lean (2 months ago)
I'm regularly accused of "cherry picking" or "hiding" evidence because I don't put all the statements, transcripts, etc, online, in full. The fact is, in Scotland, I can't.

His statement was read in open court ergo this is yet more BS

Sandra Lean (2 months ago)]The definition of disclosure of evidence to "third parties" essentially means that evidence can only be disclosed, in full, to those actively working on the case for legal proceedings (e.g. an application to the SCCRC or Court of Appeal) - the general public does not meet the definition of "third party" and disclosure to those people is prohibited. The best I can do is quote excerpts from documents, and even then, it's a fine line

 

[Nicholas]

Sandra Lean could have and should have published killer Luke Mitchell’s 22 page witness statement years ago 

His statement was read in open court ergo this is yet more BS

Sandra Lean (2 months ago)
The definition of disclosure of evidence to "third parties" essentially means that evidence can only be disclosed, in full, to those actively working on the case for legal proceedings (e.g. an application to the SCCRC or Court of Appeal) - the general public does not meet the definition of "third party" and disclosure to those people is prohibited. The best I can do is quote excerpts from documents, and even then, it's a fine line

 

“In the spirit of true justice and transparency”

This is what Sandra Lean stated on her flawed petition knowing full well she has been far from transparent

[Nicholas]

LM wasn’t home at 10.50? One question….when did he collect Mia if he didn’t go home?

Sometime after leaving the boys he’d met at the Abbey

He was spotted by a neighbour at 10pm - around the same time a fire was detected in his back garden

’Mr Frankland, the Mitchell's next door neighbour in the same street, described seeing a brick-built log burner alight in the garden on 30 June last year.
He said the burner was "typically" used by Mr Mitchell's mother.
Mr Frankland added: "It would be just before 2200 BST.
"I might have been aware of it earlier than that but I don't recall anything specific."
He told police he heard voices but could not definitely say who the people were.
The same night, he also saw Luke Mitchell walking in the street as he settled down to watch television at about 2200 BST.


‘George Ramage, 37, whose garden in Newbattle Abbey Crescent, Dalkeith, backs on to the Mitchell family's back garden, said he was putting tools in his garage about 10pm when he became aware of smoke.
He told the High Court in Edinburgh: 'It was coming from the Mitchells' garden. It wasn't a food smell, it was an unusual smell.
'It was not like burning wood or anything you normally burn. I made a comment to my wife along the lines it was a strange time to have a barbecue and, if it was food, I wouldn't eat it.'

[Nicholas]

The Mitchells repeatedly handed over false accounts to the police - There is nothing placing LM home at 10:50pm and everything to show us that his mother knew nothing at this point

Text from Corinne Mitchell to her killer son Luke Mitchell

“You will tell me right now what is wrong. I'm on my way up to find you”

Corinne Mitchell evidence during the trial

“I kept trying to phone him as he was late and in trouble”

Yet killer Luke Mitchell told police it was his mother Corinne Mitchell’s suggestion he go out searching

What was the story about killer Luke watching a video?

[Nicholas]

Yet killer Luke Mitchell told police it was his mother Corinne Mitchell’s suggestion he go out searching

Why didn’t Corinne Mitchell correct her killer son when he told police it was his mothers ‘suggestion’ he go looking for Jodi Jones?

She was next next to him in Dalkeith police station when he told police this

[Nicholas]

“In the spirit of true justice and transparency”

This is what innocence fraudster Sandra Lean stated on her fraudulent petition knowing full well she has been far from transparent

Where was Shane Mitchell and what was he doing? (Part 42)
‘Why has Sandra Lean lied about this search trio of walking passed the cousins and so forth, why has Corinne Mitchell lied? - why do people whom profess to seek 'Truth and Justice' find it necessary to lie?
👇
http://theerrorsthatplaguethemiscarriageofjusticemovement.home.blog/2022/09/03/warped-minded-abuser-gaslighter-con-artist-hypocrite-scott-forbes-his-blatant-lies-part-42/