You are implying that SL and the Mitchells tell lies, while you tell the truth-------I haven't yet seen any reason why I should believe you rather than them . That is not saying that Luke told no lies (he obviously WAS familiar with the woods, for example), or that Sandra gets some things wrong. It may also be the case that Luke is as guilty as sin------but I certainly don't have your confidence! How do you know, for sure, that he wasn't at home? How do you know for sure that he didn't cook dinner? How do you know for sure that he met up with Jodi that evening?
For the most part it is not about believing me? - I have said this before, it is the Crowns case and the evidence given by the Mitchells themselves?!
The dinner saga. Again not about me but those ever changing times around it. The lies can not be any clearer? You are in effect saying that it does not matter? Accepting the only version that had to fit into less than 15mins? Which was not possible. Time for CM to get in the door, for that dinner to be finished cooking, to sit and eat and for SM to leave before 5.30 and Luke by 5.30pm. When you do not even know what kind of Prawns had to be cooked or all else?
Can you even begin to understand and explain why you feel that dinner tale was not concocted? We have already had Faith explain a friend told her it is possible to eat a dinner in 10mins. The reality is it had nothing to do with the time to eat, it all had to fit in.
So we just ignore the rest? the cooking, the getting home at 5.05pm SM after being coerced by his mother actually said he physically spoke with her, at 5.05pm. Of him not seeing his brother whilst leaving the estate? Of Luke leaving to tie his story in with meeting with Jodi at 6pm? Thus why he claimed to leave around 5.45pm. You said you liked to look out the box?/
Here is out the box - The time for after dinner was 6pm in the Mitchell house. This was the norm. it was the norm as CM cooked when she got home, usually around five past five. The time it took to cook, dish up and eat and over with. They were sticking with the norm! But tying LM into it in detail. The brandishing the broccoli, the mashing the tatties, the going in front of the TV, the going out the back to speak with his mother, the pleasantries and all else. And do we also just ignore the weather, That drizzly rain, it being overcast and somewhat cool for the time of year. That CM was enjoying the summer sunshine in her garden, eating out on the patio? Also out the box is the claim of being cooped up at work all day, for the family business involved a lot of outdoor work? Do we not have here, that placing of herself in the back garden? Where those fires were to take place?
So this dinner tale, that you appear to be sure of, that LM cooked the dinner - How did SM manage to speak with his mother at five past five? To go upstairs and return ten mins later to collect dinner, to return upstairs, eat and be out the door pre 5.30pm. This change of story which was impossible. But he did not know this at the time, neither did CM - for it was before they had got access to that CCTV footage - they listened and they let the Mitchells put one foot after the other in it. Not the police fabricating anything, the fabrication came directly from the Mitchells?
As with the search party, only that briefest of information, a dog standing up at wall mattered - Every other lie that came out of Mitchells mouth was acceptable - and you do not find it odd? That one is attempting to bring LM back to the V, to tie in with the truth of the search trio?? That it had to have been clear differences in those accounts that made the police suspicious. There would have been no suspicion if every account were the same. That simply stands to reason. That stark reality of Ms Lean not producing direct accounts from those statements, fully in sequence, for they do not exist.
Admit to believing he lied about the woods - He lied about most everything. - Why?
So no, it is not about me, or believing me - It is if one chooses to believe the evidence, they the Mitchells gave. The clear lies in all of this. Of the further evidence by the Crown - the sightings.
Why do you feel they gave this relaxed dinner tale that had to fit around those 40mins to be anywhere near feasible. That SM changed his story to exactly match those times - For those times to vanish? For that first call at 5.32 had connected. CM had been seen on CCTV. And the search trio, It was LM who was found out to be lying, to the point of even drawing a diagram - his lies could not have been any clearer - Why?
And I, as with the defence and all else - have found nothing that shows Jodi's family lied. There have been feeble attempts made, there is nothing. And it does stand to reason, that for LM to have been telling the truth they had to be lying? That the clear lies we do see, straight from the Mitchells, nothing to do with the police, tell us, which of these two sides, that Ms Lean has created - were not complicit in this girls death.
To use nonsense such as "we will never know" - is BS.
