Author Topic: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003  (Read 722897 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline OnceSaid

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1198
John posts, "That's because she got slashed on her upper limbs while fending off the knife attack. She never made contact with her attacker since she was incapable of doing so. Jodi's fingernails contained only material from Jodi, she never touched her attacker no matter how much she struggled to get away.  I wonder how far you would get if bludgeoned over the head with a large stick?"

John, where have you read that Jodis fingernails contained only material from Jodi?  The findings on the right hand fingernails were never reported on, so how do we know that Jodi never touched her attacker?

Offline smiffy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2000
John posts, "That's because she got slashed on her upper limbs while fending off the knife attack. She never made contact with her attacker since she was incapable of doing so. Jodi's fingernails contained only material from Jodi, she never touched her attacker no matter how much she struggled to get away.  I wonder how far you would get if bludgeoned over the head with a large stick?"

John, where have you read that Jodis fingernails contained only material from Jodi?  The findings on the right hand fingernails were never reported on, so how do we know that Jodi never touched her attacker?

John doesnt know the answer
as usual living in his warped fantasy world..

Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16846
    • 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
John posts, "That's because she got slashed on her upper limbs while fending off the knife attack. She never made contact with her attacker since she was incapable of doing so. Jodi's fingernails contained only material from Jodi, she never touched her attacker no matter how much she struggled to get away.  I wonder how far you would get if bludgeoned over the head with a large stick?"

John, where have you read that Jodis fingernails contained only material from Jodi?  The findings on the right hand fingernails were never reported on, so how do we know that Jodi never touched her attacker?

well mark kane was rejected as a suspect becouse the scraches on his face dident match.

what was under the victems nails.

that would sugest she must of scratched somebody but certainly not him.

John

  • Guest
John posts, "That's because she got slashed on her upper limbs while fending off the knife attack. She never made contact with her attacker since she was incapable of doing so. Jodi's fingernails contained only material from Jodi, she never touched her attacker no matter how much she struggled to get away.  I wonder how far you would get if bludgeoned over the head with a large stick?"

John, where have you read that Jodis fingernails contained only material from Jodi?  The findings on the right hand fingernails were never reported on, so how do we know that Jodi never touched her attacker?

That's quite correct OnceSaid.  It is all there in the pathologists report...Jodi's fingernails only contained material genetically related to Jodi. 

Jodi never scratched her attacker so that would fall into line with Mitchell not having any recent scratches on him and his face in particular.

Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16846
    • 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
it dident say that it said no reportable result not the same thing.

Offline smiffy

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2000
it dident say that it said no reportable result not the same thing.

thats correct nugnug :)

Offline OnceSaid

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1198
it dident say that it said no reportable result not the same thing.

thats correct nugnug :)

Im confused now, I was of the understanding there was no right hand fingernail scrapings reported on, just the left hand.

Who is wrong here, me or John ?

Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16846
    • 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 think your right oncesaid.

Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16846
    • 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
should we start a new thread on this as this thread has got a bit confusing.

Offline OnceSaid

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1198
should we start a new thread on this as this thread has got a bit confusing.

The thread is full of inaccuracies and blatant lies.  I believe this thread was deliberately set up to mislead readers.  Personally I think it should be deleted from the site all together. At the end of the day a young lad is fighting to prove his innocence, and he needs the truth to be told so that people can see for themselves what he has had to endure since 30th June 2003, when he was just 14 years old.  :(
Who killed JJ, it was not LM in my opinion.

Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16846
    • 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
are well maybe we can correct those inaccuracy's

i agrea this thread was justed by john to have a pop at certain people.

do you think i should start a thread on his case.

Offline OnceSaid

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1198
are well maybe we can correct those inaccuracy's

i agrea this thread was justed by john to have a pop at certain people.

do you think i should start a thread on his case.

Quick answer, No. 

PM sent.  ;)

Janet

  • Guest
should we start a new thread on this as this thread has got a bit confusing.

The thread is full of inaccuracies and blatant lies.  I believe this thread was deliberately set up to mislead readers.  Personally I think it should be deleted from the site all together. At the end of the day a young lad is fighting to prove his innocence, and he needs the truth to be told so that people can see for themselves what he has had to endure since 30th June 2003, when he was just 14 years old.  :(
Who killed JJ, it was not LM in my opinion.

Your opinion nor mine does not count as evidence Once Said.

Any thread that is not fully supportive of Luke Mitchell and looks at the whole case and the evidence against him is deemed inaccurate by supporters. Everything cannot be inaccurate.

I believe this thread was set up to redress the balance not to discredit anyone.

Whatever happened to freedom of thought and speech?

Online nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 16846
    • 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
oh i agree it shouldent be deleted.

for one thing it shows john in his true coulers witch is good.

this thread basically started by john to have a pop at people on another forum not related to this.


Offline OnceSaid

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1198
should we start a new thread on this as this thread has got a bit confusing.

The thread is full of inaccuracies and blatant lies.  I believe this thread was deliberately set up to mislead readers.  Personally I think it should be deleted from the site all together. At the end of the day a young lad is fighting to prove his innocence, and he needs the truth to be told so that people can see for themselves what he has had to endure since 30th June 2003, when he was just 14 years old.  :(
Who killed JJ, it was not LM in my opinion.

Your opinion nor mine does not count as evidence Once Said. Any thread that is not fully supportive of Luke Mitchell and looks at the whole case and the evidence against him is deemed inaccurate by supporters. Everything cannot be inaccurate.

I believe this thread was set up to redress the balance not to discredit anyone.

Whatever happened to freedom of thought and speech?

Correct.  However there is evidence in abundance to support LM's innocence and it is not contained in the posts here from JL.  This thread was not started to give a balanced view, it was started with malicious intent, end of.  Janet have you any idea how difficult it is for someone who is factually innocent to prove that innocence?  Obviously not.  ::)