Author Topic: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones  (Read 2684 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline marty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 437
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2370 on: November 07, 2019, 07:35:PM »
Yeah but he went for a jog in the river and pulled every cord in his parka to make it look like it was clumped at the back and a fishing style/pilot/german army shirt.
Thats when i stopped reading his posts.

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2371 on: November 07, 2019, 08:50:PM »
I am not listening to the podcasts BTW.  Am I missing anything?

In short no. I found them helpful for study purpose.
Full of contradiction and dare I say - suspects and theories.
CM herself appears to have around 5, all equally responsible.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 910
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2372 on: November 08, 2019, 07:35:PM »
So this, attempt by the defence to cause doubt on, when the sighting in the shop was - i.e. it was before the murder, he saw Luke in the shop wearing the Parka.
Was of course no doubt, swiftly clarified by the prosecution. You can of course add anything to "because of the murder and everything". When the rest of
the information is missing.

Ok, Parky, from this, it appears you assume that the prosecution "swiftly clarified" when the sighting was. So, tell everyone, what was said, and how was it clarified? What is the "rest of the information" that is "missing" (and which, presumably, the prosecution clarified)?

I'll help out with the start - the witness had already stated that he had seen Luke in a local shop wearing a Parka jacket. Donald Findlay asked him what, in particular, caused him to notice what Luke was wearing and that it was, categorically, a Parka jacket. The witness responded, "because of the murder and everything."

Over to you.

(Clue, he couldn't have noticed anything "because of the murder and everything" prior to the murder.)

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2373 on: Yesterday at 12:16 PM »
Why do you assume the "confessor told all"? You know nothing of the events surrounding the confession and I'm not about to make public information that could potentially assist Luke's case in the future so, sorry, if that's not to your liking, so be it. But please don't then leap to conclusions about what other people "assume" from that when you, yourself, are quite capable of making completely unfounded assumptions.

Naturally so - We all are drawn to making some assumption, and you are of course correct, why would the confessor tell all?
After all, this actual confession, could be of anything - and not of this murder.
It simply could be, Just that, some form of confession.
Of course, we also have your podcast, where you state when this confession was, so let us assume? it is of this murder.
And, of above, about the events surrounding it. CM states it was a member of the police themselves who informed you.
That this confession took place prior to Luke's trial, whilst he was on remand?
We have a, claimed positive ID of a stocky man, who confessed prior to this trial.
It may be of value, of some assistance in Luke's case in the future - yet held absolutely no value at trial, at appeals and so forth.
Does this in itself, not spell out the truth - and I, as many others do, more accurately make the assumption, that there is no weight, relevance or
anything, that actually matters, behind this misrepresented, manipulative piece of information.
That there is in reality - nothing to prove that Luke did not kill Jodi, bar wild theories and speculation.
That these theories and speculation - stem primarily from CM and yourself, from the information that is being pushed out. From past and present
scenarios. It is, after all, as you clearly state, simply "putting the information out there" It is up to each individual what they may draw from this.
If it Is for innocence, the additive arms and legs are brushed over, simple mistakes. If not - then, hell mend you?
You simply can not put fault with anyone - who badly stiches together, a somewhat impossible gap. From those one liners, from multiple statements.
From those many 'other' sources - used, that inevitably, add weight to air.