How do you explain the 360 degree change to position by the press?
The media doing their job, reporting anything to sell stories. It is not surprising that you see a positive in this. More of the same is it not? A convicted killer claiming all sorts, fancy that. Not to forget it being fuelled with utter nonsense of course.
"The tide is turning" How many times has that tide been turning, it is this that is on a full 360-degree turn is it not, that number of times it has been on the turn.
These forensics and I have asked the question and do so again, has there been property of Mitchell's destroyed without contacting him?
Let us highlight the legalities once more, shall we. Most of that list could have been signed off and disposed of the minute that guilty verdict came through. From January 2005. Then we move on to that which played a part to do with the case at trial and those 12yrs in Scotland for 'solved' series crime, already well past that threshold. Can you see any "illicit" dealings here bar of course, IF personal property has been disposed of.
So, the knife in a skip, that parka belonging to their friend, even the knife in 2010, all legally able to be signed off and disposed of a long time ago. Yet they have held on to everything for so long, where and again, it is Mitchell's failure in not being able to secure any legal team worth their salt, to do anything, with anything - No one else's.
The further nonsense of anything being "hidden" and as above, held on to long past any legal threshold. And as stated, maybe after all these allowances, there has been a few people p****d off by this smear-campaign, Mitchell evoking actions by his very own ones? - And again, just a thought.
The forensics in this case, the manipulation and those claims. From the off of being botched up, everything bar Mitchell of course, all in order and executed perfectly - Behave. The claim of bias in favour of a police narrative, there was NO police narrative when that team went into those woods and beyond. Nor of every sample taken postmortem by the pathologist. A professional body of experts carrying out their role, in favour of no-one.
But it pays to play dumb to the dumb does it not? Nothing matching any report, all botched, so botched up they had (F) semen. To the point of IB going to print and the same claims. Just not Mitchell's of course, his hair sample, his nails, his clothing, his house, all in perfect order, just everything else wrong - Hook, line and sinker. - Behave.
Not all lost however, there are still those very detailed reports, the further testing by the SCCRC - Hand them over Mr Mitchell, let an actual expert independently study and put out a public report on their findings - It should already have happened of course, intentionally not? Much better to say they were in a mess, to play dumb and put out all sorts around them. Those blind in faith - Such a mess unless it has Luke's name next to it. Bar of course that agreement, dam, think of the positive here, one can keep on claiming there was not a snifter of him found - As if.
