Author Topic: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003  (Read 288066 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14188
    • 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
😂😂😂😂

"Corinne and Shane were both with Luke at the time of the murder"

"Well phone records prove the house phone was being used, and we know for certain Shane wasn't home, and we know for certain Corinne wasn't home. So it must've been Luke"

The Mitchells can't ever really seem to keep their story straight when it comes to Luke's alibi.

Luke was burning a chicken pie. Shane wasn't home. Shane was home watching porn so Luke must not have been in. Wait, Shane was at work... But Luke made dinner for them though. Wait Luke burned the dinner. So what did they eat? Corinne was at work. But wait Corinne was with him lol.

he was uusing the internet so he must of been home.

if shane wasnt home who was using it.
« Last Edit: April 06, 2019, 03:17:PM by nugnug »


Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14188
    • 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 wonder why they went to amerca was it just for a free jolly up.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/3378781.stm

Offline marty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 339
Luke was at home, alone, making and answering calls prior to the claimed time of the murder. Two points to be made about this - (1) it refutes any suggestion that he didn't go home from school but went to lie in wait for Jodi in the woodland strip (as has been claimed at certain points). (2) In conjunction with the texts with Jodi's mum's phone, it supports the statement that he would not have had enough time to get from his home to the top of the path in time to be the person seen by Andrina Bryson.

His brother called ahead to say he might be late for dinner - in the event, he wasn't late (but did get home later than he would have if he'd come straight home from work). Brother came home, then mum came home. Both said Luke was in the house by the time they both got there (4.50 and 5.15 respectively.

The nonsense about Shane saying he didn't see Luke was brought about by police manipulation of the entire family - even the appeal judges agreed the "evidence," as it was manipulated, would not have been admissible if Shane had been a suspect, but because he was a witness, the same protections didn't apply.

Who did Luke make and answer calls to and from prior to the claimed time of the murder. Talking clock would be one.

Offline Lithium

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
No evidence, ever, for "time of murder." Plenty of evidence that Luke regularly called the speaking clock from his mobile.

Plenty of evidence that Luke regularly called the speaking clock from his mobile while at home?

I'm all ears.


Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 681
Who did Luke make and answer calls to and from prior to the claimed time of the murder. Talking clock would be one.

Speaking clock call was made from his mobile. Call from his brother's mobile to the landline and call from the home landline to his mother's work landline are registered in the phone logs.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 681
Plenty of evidence that Luke regularly called the speaking clock from his mobile while at home?

I'm all ears.

Calls prior to 8.30am (when he left for school) and between 4 and 5pm (when he was home from school cooking dinner on all the evenings it's never been disputed that's where he was)

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14188
    • 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
Calls prior to 8.30am (when he left for school) and between 4 and 5pm (when he was home from school cooking dinner on all the evenings it's never been disputed that's where he was)

i never saw the relvance anyway what the hell is so sinster about phoning the speaking clock.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 14188
    • 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
« Last Edit: April 10, 2019, 12:07:PM by nugnug »

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 681
Yes, updates coming soon!!!

Offline marty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 339
Speaking clock call was made from his mobile. Call from his brother's mobile to the landline and call from the home landline to his mother's work landline are registered in the phone logs.

Thank you, just getting the sequence of events clear in my mind.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 681
3:30 -  school finished
4.15 -  Luke called his mother from the home landline to her work landline (his grandmother answered the call before passing it to Corinne, so there are two witnesses plus the phone logs).
4.25 - call from Shane's mobile to the home landline connected for just over a minute. Neither Luke nor Shane remembered this call initially - it wasn't until the phone logs showed it and Shane remembered he'd stopped at a friend's on the way home from work that they realised the call was Shane letting Luke know he might be late home for dinner.
4,34 - 4.38 - exchange of texts between Luke's phone and Jodi's mother's phone (Jodi's phone was broken)
4.54 - Luke called the speaking clock from his mobile. Shane was on the internet, so the landline was busy.

If the claim was that the call to the speaking clock placed Luke outside his home and the Andrina Bryson sighting was of Luke, why did she not mention a phone in her description? She said the youth had both hands at his sides, palms facing forward, at exactly the time of the call to the speaking clock.

And, if Luke left home immediately after the final 4.38 text from Jodi, there would not be enough time for him to be the person at the Easthouses entrance to the path, which is why the suggestion arose that he didn't go straight home from school but, instead, went to the woodland strip to lie in wait for Jodi.

That then unravels because he wouldn't have known about the sudden decision to "unground" Jodi at 4.34pm - why would he be "lying in wait" for her if she was grounded?

Offline Lithium

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 240
If Luke was at home making calls from his mobile near the time of murder why didn't the defense use Cell Site Analysis to clear him?


Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 681
The Legal Aid Board refused funding, saying the expert was "too expensive." But why didn't the police do it? It's up to the prosecution to prove guilt - the eyewitness evidence was extremely weak - if they were sure the guy seen at the Easthouses entrance to the path at 4.54 was Luke, why didn't they use cell site evidence to back it up?

I suspect they probably did get cell site analysis and, when it didn't show movement of Luke's phone, they buried it - wouldn't have been the first or only time it happened in this case as we now know. They didn't release the FBA profile or the information about the identification of Stocky Man at the time - just makes me wonder what else they have that the defence never saw.