Misleading statements from the police or prosecution

[Nicholas]

There was simply this search party, going down this path - and of a dog sniffing at a wall and pulling. That LM entered this woodland, no unfamiliarity, no trepidation - nothing. He turned immediately to his left.

And we know without a shadow of a doubt, that they did not say they had walked passed this V at the point of the dog doing anything, and we know there was no evidence of this dog alerting to Jodi in the slightest - it was a dog, doing what dogs do. When one wants to talk 'wafer thin' These claims and attempts to show any different are transparent to the max -

 

[Nicholas]

And we know without a shadow of a doubt, that JaJ and AW could see LM on the other side of this V - we are being asked to disbelief this due to their height- really? Of these blatant lies that the base of this V is 6ft from the ground. And we know the torch light was the major factor of knowing exactly which way he turned, immediately upon entering this woodland.

And this was proved beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[Nicholas]

And this was proved beyond reasonable doubt. That LM, the search trio and his dog were not passed this V break - and Ms lean, relies heavily upon them not and never saying, it was Luke's dog that found Jodi then they said it wasn't - And from this point and of every other lie that fell off his lips - we are being asked to believe the search trio were not being honest? -Really? With these wafer thin, transparent, empty of substance claims. Grasping and scraping to find something solid against the abundance of evidence against LM. - Of what happened on this brief time on that path.

Of introducing the woodland at the Gino spot. Of being unaffected, of leading the emergency services/ police a merry dance whilst others were screaming in the background. For that was what was in that call - the recording played in court.

 

[Nicholas]

Ms Lean may have hoped over time that her need to troll and infiltrate every discussion may win the day - The hope that in 9weeks of a trial. A crammed court room. Of legal bodies, media, students, spectators and so forth - That her 'knowledge is power' cries - would be thwarted at every angle.

Of people getting told that what they say holds no water as they can not cite as much as she can? - for she holds the defence papers. - Complete and utter bias, that citing snip bits proves absolutely nothing. Completely empty of substance. The only part that is true, is those few words verbatim, the official timings of calls and so forth. Manipulating and playing around with these times to suit.

 

[Nicholas]

And of those recordings - Of LM toying with the operator. Of those screams in the background. Of SK taking over the call and screaming "It's a f*****g body".

 

[Nicholas]

And like the statements of the search trio, of AB and just about anyone else - the same method is used - to add weight to air.

 

[Nicholas]

Everything around what happened needs to be known - not these futile claims of the dog leading LM anywhere. - Of CM and Findlay not listening to them "my way or the high way" Of not speaking with SL? - of other legal teams not touching them with a barge pole - One wonders why?  Is it not more of a case of "It's our way or no way" of CM "All Findlay had to do was walk in and say, we have blood, sperm, hair, none of it Luke's, I rest my case" 

[Nicholas]

How honest do you feel the Mitchells were Chris?

⬆️

[mrswah]

Led a merry dance down the garden path - Of everyone all agreeing it was the dog who led LM to Jodi. You mention the parka and of how a statement may give a false impression, that they could be talking about the Jacket bought after this murder, you need to see more. - As with the above - Of everyone agreeing it was the dog who led LM to Jodi - completely false and misleading statement. Firstly the dog led no one to Jodi, the dog was not in this woodland. Secondly the dog was only ever at this V break in the wall. So what we can gleam from this, at the very most - is that the dog led LM directly to the V, for him them to enter this woodland. We know the evidence around this "the dogs head being level with the V" and "dog pulling to the V" - and that these statements changed to LM going directly to this V - Not changed however, clarified. As LM did go straight to this V, it was always stated this way. His dog was on the lead, a dog pulling towards a wall, how very unusual? - Now if this search trio were making statements to the effect, that the dog starting going crazy, she was barking, frantically jumping at the wall, and it had been well passed this V - you get the drift. But there was none of this, was there? There was simply this search party, going down this path - and of a dog sniffing at a wall and pulling. That LM entered this woodland, no unfamiliarity, no trepidation - nothing. He turned immediately to his left.

And we know without a shadow of a doubt, that they did not say they had walked passed this V at the point of the dog doing anything, and we know there was no evidence of this dog alerting to Jodi in the slightest - it was a dog, doing what dogs do. When one wants to talk 'wafer thin' These claims and attempts to show any different are transparent to the max - And we know without a shadow of a doubt, that JaJ and AW could see LM on the other side of this V - we are being asked to disbelief this due to their height- really? Of these blatant lies that the base of this V is 6ft from the ground. And we know the torch light was the major factor of knowing exactly which way he turned, immediately upon entering this woodland.

And this was proved beyond reasonable doubt. That LM, the search trio and his dog were not passed this V break - and Ms lean, relies heavily upon them not and never saying, it was Luke's dog that found Jodi then they said it wasn't - And from this point and of every other lie that fell off his lips - we are being asked to believe the search trio were not being honest? -Really? With these wafer thin, transparent, empty of substance claims. Grasping and scraping to find something solid against the abundance of evidence against LM. - Of what happened on this brief time on that path.

Of introducing the woodland at the Gino spot. Of being unaffected, of leading the emergency services/ police a merry dance whilst others were screaming in the background. For that was what was in that call - the recording played in court. Ms Lean may have hoped over time that her need to troll and infiltrate every discussion may win the day - The hope that in 9weeks of a trial. A crammed court room. Of legal bodies, media, students, spectators and so forth - That her 'knowledge is power' cries - would be thwarted at every angle.

Of people getting told that what they say holds no water as they can not cite as much as she can? - for she holds the defence papers. - Complete and utter bias, that citing snip bits proves absolutely nothing. Completely empty of substance. The only part that is true, is those few words verbatim, the official timings of calls and so forth. Manipulating and playing around with these times to suit.

And of those recordings - Of LM toying with the operator. Of those screams in the background. Of SK taking over the call and screaming "It's a f*****g body". And like the statements of the search trio, of AB and just about anyone else - the same method is used - to add weight to air. Everything around what happened needs to be known - not these futile claims of the dog leading LM anywhere. - Of CM and Findlay not listening to them "my way or the high way" Of not speaking with SL? - of other legal teams not touching them with a barge pole - One wonders why?  Is it not more of a case of "It's our way or no way" of CM "All Findlay had to do was walk in and say, we have blood, sperm, hair, none of it Luke's, I rest my case"

How honest do you feel the Mitchells were Chris?

How do you know what the dog did or didn't do?  Were you there?

[Brietta]

How do you know what the dog did or didn't do?  Were you there?

There were people there who have testified to what the dog did or didn't do.
Snip
As they walked down the path, they saw Luke Mitchell, also carrying a torch, coming towards them. The four of them plus Mitchell's dog then started to walk back down the path.

Janine says Mitchell went through a V-shaped gap in the wall. She adds: 'We heard Luke shouting there was something there or he had found something.'
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/THE+JODI+JONES+TRIAL%3A+'We+heard+Luke+shouting+there+was+something...-a0126045465

The court was convened in an area covering the wall and the break in the wall leading to the deposition site where Jodi's body had been left.  I would imagine that Mitchell's version of events was heard along with that of the three other witnesses.

It was obviously considered to be an area of paramount importance since it was deemed necessary to construct a replica wall in the courtroom.

If we had to have been there to discuss particular aspects of this or any other case there would be no blogs - no social media and no fora such as ours.
From what I have witnessed and read ~ that might indeed be no bad thing.

[faithlilly]

There were people there who have testified to what the dog did or didn't do.
Snip
As they walked down the path, they saw Luke Mitchell, also carrying a torch, coming towards them. The four of them plus Mitchell's dog then started to walk back down the path.

Janine says Mitchell went through a V-shaped gap in the wall. She adds: 'We heard Luke shouting there was something there or he had found something.'
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/THE+JODI+JONES+TRIAL%3A+'We+heard+Luke+shouting+there+was+something...-a0126045465

The court was convened in an area covering the wall and the break in the wall leading to the deposition site where Jodi's body had been left.  I would imagine that Mitchell's version of events was heard along with that of the three other witnesses.

It was obviously considered to be an area of paramount importance since it was deemed necessary to construct a replica wall in the courtroom.

If we had to have been there to discuss particular aspects of this or any other case there would be no blogs - no social media and no fora such as ours.
From what I have witnessed and read ~ that might indeed be no bad thing.

‘ Cross-examining Janine, Donald Findlay QC says: 'The fact of the matter is, the only person who showed any interest in checking behind the wall was Luke.'

Janine replies: 'Yes.'

Donald Findlay reads a statement given by Janine to police in the early hours of July 1 in which she said that 'everyone was in hysterics'.

Under cross-examination, Janine says: 'The only time Luke showed any emotion was when he was on the phone to the police and we started shouting at him and then he started to raise his voice.'

Findlay asks: 'Are you saying the police have written something wrong in the statement.'

Janine answers: 'I may have phrased it wrong. They may have taken it down wrong. I didn't mean everyone was in hysterics.

'As I said, the police have misrepresented it.'

https://www.thefreelibrary.com/THE+JODI+JONES+TRIAL%3A+%27We+heard+Luke+shouting+there+was+something...-a0126045465

It’s interesting that where there was another witness, not family, to Luke’s distress the way  Janine concedes the fact.

Let us not forget that JaJ would have read the statement she made to the police and signed it as a true representation of what she said.

[Vertigo Swirl]

IMO Luke wanted to be there when the body was recovered so that he could enjoy the others’ reactions to the grisly sight.

[Nicholas]

Why didn’t Corinne go with him?

Where was her concern for missing Jodi?

[mrswah]

IMO Luke wanted to be there when the body was recovered so that he could enjoy the others’ reactions to the grisly sight.

IMO, a guilty person would want to be as far away as possible when the body was discovered, but, as I say, just my opinion!

[mrswah]

There were people there who have testified to what the dog did or didn't do.
Snip
As they walked down the path, they saw Luke Mitchell, also carrying a torch, coming towards them. The four of them plus Mitchell's dog then started to walk back down the path.

Janine says Mitchell went through a V-shaped gap in the wall. She adds: 'We heard Luke shouting there was something there or he had found something.'
https://www.thefreelibrary.com/THE+JODI+JONES+TRIAL%3A+'We+heard+Luke+shouting+there+was+something...-a0126045465

The court was convened in an area covering the wall and the break in the wall leading to the deposition site where Jodi's body had been left.  I would imagine that Mitchell's version of events was heard along with that of the three other witnesses.

It was obviously considered to be an area of paramount importance since it was deemed necessary to construct a replica wall in the courtroom.

If we had to have been there to discuss particular aspects of this or any other case there would be no blogs - no social media and no fora such as ours.
From what I have witnessed and read ~ that might indeed be no bad thing.

I heard that, the first time they were questioned by police, all four members of the search party said that they were alerted by the dog.