Author Topic: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003  (Read 266627 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14091
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Good luck to Luke! He has a strong team behind him which is fantastic to see. i will await the updates and hope justice is done very soon

It isnt just that Luke has has 15 years taken from him life but a killer is also walking free. Time to swap places now.

i secound that.

Offline lilly15

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 66
A lot of people will then be eating their words. They dont count though, Just Luke and his freedom.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14091
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
I don't want to put a damper on things
 we have thought this before I not going to count the chckens before there hatched.
« Last Edit: September 16, 2018, 04:48:PM by nugnug »

Offline lilly15

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 66
I agree, got to be realistic but its good to know Luke has a chance

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14091
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
I agree, got to be realistic but its good to know Luke has a chance

its great that theres going to be a public campaign again.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
Hi, it's been a while!!

Nugnug's right - we've been here soooo many times before. But it is good that the story is back in the public domain.

Thanks to those still interested in discussing the case and all the failings of the original investigation, trial, etc  - bear with us over the next few months, I know it's been a long time with apparently nothing happening, but progress has been, and is being, made.

I'll update as soon as I'm able. Thanks again!

Offline marty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 334
Seeing as you seem to be back involved in a big way Sandra. Will you guys be putting Luke’s website back up with all the info which was available before when you had the case papers.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
That's not a decision for me, Marty - although I'm involved with the review team, I'm not the principal decision-maker.

However, there are discussions underway regarding an online presence for the case and the best way to go about that - I should be able to report back on this within the next couple of weeks.

As soon as I know what's happening, I will post here - Luke's had some really good support on this forum, so it's only right that this should be one of the first places to know about new developments.


Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
Today, my book about the case, Innocents Betrayed, was launched. Profits from the book are being donated to help fund a new organisation, Long Road to Justice, which will be taking a radically new approach to helping the fight against injustice.

Details of the book can be found here:

www.longroadtojustice.com

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 40043
LUKE MITCHELL IS INNOCENT !

Sandra,what are your thoughts on Stephen/Steven Kelly ?

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14091
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Today, my book about the case, Innocents Betrayed, was launched. Profits from the book are being donated to help fund a new organisation, Long Road to Justice, which will be taking a radically new approach to helping the fight against injustice.

Details of the book can be found here:

www.longroadtojustice.com

thankuou ill check them out.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14091
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
LUKE MITCHELL IS INNOCENT !

Sandra,what are your thoughts on Stephen/Steven Kelly ?

have you been researching him lookout.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 40043
have you been researching him lookout.





Yes nugs besides others.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 644
Hi, sorry it's taken me a few days to get back.

Although I've made this point many times in the past, I'll make it again, just for clarity. When I discuss people connected with this case, I'm not making any suggestion that they're guilty (or possibly guilty) of anything - I'm pointing out failings in the police investigation.

My take on Kelly is that it was absolutely bizarre that the police handed him an innocent explanation for his DNA being found on the t-shirt Jodi was wearing. Fifteen years later, it has still not been confirmed that the t-shirt was definitely one of Janine's that Jodi borrowed without permission. There was none of Janine's DNA on the t-shirt and it was "freshly laundered," yet had visible semen staining on it.

The "washing machine transfer" or "rainwater transfer" theories do not, and cannot, account for visible semen staining. It also had a large saliva stain; the originator of that saliva was never identified. How, amongst all of that visible evidence, could anyone be certain that a full DNA profile got there by transfer in a washing machine, prior to the depositing of the other substances?

The rainwater theory is even less credible - it means DNA from Kelly had to first survive a machine wash (which is, theoretically, possible) and then be transferred, by the rain, from wherever it survived on the t-shirt, following the wash, to where it was found. But the prosecution theory was that only Kelly's DNA was transferred by rainwater - that same rainwater didn't transfer or disperse the visible semen or saliva staining.


Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14091
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
Hi, sorry it's taken me a few days to get back.

Although I've made this point many times in the past, I'll make it again, just for clarity. When I discuss people connected with this case, I'm not making any suggestion that they're guilty (or possibly guilty) of anything - I'm pointing out failings in the police investigation.

My take on Kelly is that it was absolutely bizarre that the police handed him an innocent explanation for his DNA being found on the t-shirt Jodi was wearing. Fifteen years later, it has still not been confirmed that the t-shirt was definitely one of Janine's that Jodi borrowed without permission. There was none of Janine's DNA on the t-shirt and it was "freshly laundered," yet had visible semen staining on it.

The "washing machine transfer" or "rainwater transfer" theories do not, and cannot, account for visible semen staining. It also had a large saliva stain; the originator of that saliva was never identified. How, amongst all of that visible evidence, could anyone be certain that a full DNA profile got there by transfer in a washing machine, prior to the depositing of the other substances?

The rainwater theory is even less credible - it means DNA from Kelly had to first survive a machine wash (which is, theoretically, possible) and then be transferred, by the rain, from wherever it survived on the t-shirt, following the wash, to where it was found. But the prosecution theory was that only Kelly's DNA was transferred by rainwater - that same rainwater didn't transfer or disperse the visible semen or saliva staining.

ive never heard of another case were this has been cliamed.


what is also strane is kelly did not come with this xplanation himself the police did

how lucky is that the police explianing away the evdnce for you

and i cant think of any other case in the uk where this has happend.
« Last Edit: October 31, 2018, 01:47:PM by nugnug »