Author Topic: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones  (Read 18629 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline marty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 458
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: 187
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: 968
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2372 on: November 08, 2019, 07:35:PM »
Quote
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: 187
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2373 on: November 25, 2019, 12:23:PM »
S.Lean:
Quote
"He was the only searcher. the others didn't leave for another 15-20mins, after Luke left"

Luke got a call at 10.49pm he is on this path at 10.59pm.
The search trio left at or about 11.04pm.

All correct.

10.49pm until 11.04pm or thereafter. 15-20mins.

Luke said to Judith he "was coming up this path with his dog" at 10.59pm.
Ms Lean now changes this to "he stopped to chat with Judith, prior to entering the path"

Judith conversed with everyone, (Luke, police and AW) which is clear by those phone logs.
Aw being in the same household as JaJ and SK - the search trio.
Telling each of this meet to search with the other.
The police also in attendance at Judiths house?

We know the somewhat ludicrous reasoning that comes forth from Ms Lean.
Luke was going to Judith's to help search, to go through friends phone numbers.
What friends? they were on a school trip. He would have been asked.
Who did Luke say or assume he would be searching with? He would have been asked.
Yet Ms Lean implies, that neither Luke or the search trio - knew each were going to search.
Ludicrous and messy.
But then Ms Lean believes the reconstruction went out - as the weather was the same?! Messy.

Leave that aside though - Luke sped up this path, he wanted to get to Judith's as quickly as possible.
Luke Mitchel should have been in Judith's well before this search trio reached Easthouses.
He was not, he simply led this search trio there.
This is why Ms Lean tries, very badly to imply the search trio left prior to Luke, she clearly states publicly (podcast) the truth.
Luke Mitchel was prepped and ready for that call coming through from this girls mother.
He instantly offers  to search.
He instantly goes to search this path.
He stays on this path - until the search trio arrive.
He instantly offers to use his dog to track.
They set off down together.
Less than 10mins later he is calling 999.
Luke Mitchel and only Luke could have did this in this time - only by knowing exactly where to go.
Simply not possible otherwise.
The best dogs and handlers In this world, could not have achieved this, in this time - with items to scent.
In these conditions, of being on a path and not in the woodland - cut off by a high thick wall.
No trained searcher, could have simply entered this woodland, and made this discovery in seconds.

His eagerness, his plan, his warped mind - snared in his own trap.
« Last Edit: November 25, 2019, 03:19:PM by Parky41 »

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2374 on: November 25, 2019, 03:22:PM »
Why neither the police, the prosecution or the SCCRC looked at the possibility of Ms Leans,
Mistaken Identity?

We are of course, referring here to MK.
This claimed doppelganger for Luke.
The same MK who was not on Newbattle Road around t-time.
The same MK who was caught on CTV footage, elsewhere.
The same MK Ms Lean put forward to the SCCRC for mistaken identity.
The same MK Ms Lean believes, could have been the person F&W witnessed.
This is of course, after repeatedly trying to imply - they only saw Luke, at the Abbey entrance.
Leave that aside however;

F&W only saw one Luke, not two.
The one Luke they saw, was at this wooden gate.
They did not see a further Luke, sitting on the wall at the end of his estate.
The did not see a further Luke standing in the Abbey entrance - looking over at this other Luke,
sitting on the wall.
 
Messy and Ludicrous.

Simply put - One youth (Luke) at the wooden gate, did not have a twin sitting or standing at the entrance to
Newbattle Abbey Crescent.
That really would have stood out.

Offline Davie2

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2375 on: November 25, 2019, 06:01:PM »
Why neither the police, the prosecution or the SCCRC looked at the possibility of Ms Leans,
Mistaken Identity?

We are of course, referring here to MK.
This claimed doppelganger for Luke.
The same MK who was not on Newbattle Road around t-time.
The same MK who was caught on CTV footage, elsewhere.
The same MK Ms Lean put forward to the SCCRC for mistaken identity.
The same MK Ms Lean believes, could have been the person F&W witnessed.
This is of course, after repeatedly trying to imply - they only saw Luke, at the Abbey entrance.
Leave that aside however;

F&W only saw one Luke, not two.
The one Luke they saw, was at this wooden gate.
They did not see a further Luke, sitting on the wall at the end of his estate.
The did not see a further Luke standing in the Abbey entrance - looking over at this other Luke,
sitting on the wall.
 
Messy and Ludicrous.

Simply put - One youth (Luke) at the wooden gate, did not have a twin sitting or standing at the entrance to
Newbattle Abbey Crescent.
That really would have stood out.

They put that poor lad though hell too. Bet he never got an apology.

Offline Davie2

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2376 on: November 25, 2019, 06:16:PM »
One thing that always used to stump me. Why did the Mitchell's never put up a reward?

Identify the 2 that apparently was not Luke & Jodi.

Identify this stocky man?

Did anyone see Luke when he left school at 3:30?

I would have sold my house, my business, if i truly believed my son was innocent.  Why no reward?

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2377 on: November 26, 2019, 07:51:AM »
Quote
Luke said to Judith he "was coming up this path with his dog" at 10.59pm.
Ms Lean now changes this to "he stopped to chat with Judith, prior to entering the path"

No. I’ve always said Luke spoke to Judith at the Newbattle entrance to the path at 10.59 and told her he was at the entrance, about to go up the path. It was Judith who said Luke told her her was “coming up the path on his bike,” later changed to “with his dog”. The two are not mutually exclusive (speaking at the entrance to the path then coming up the path, I mean, not "the dog" and "the bike" - there never was a bike).

Quote
Judith conversed with everyone, (Luke, police and AW) which is clear by those phone logs.
Aw being in the same household as JaJ and SK - the search trio.
Telling each of this meet to search with the other.
The police also in attendance at Judiths house?

Evidence? There is zero evidence that the trio knew Luke was heading for the path when they left. Both Alice and Janine tried to claim they’d spoken with or texted Luke – the phone records proved they did not. Judith said she didn’t know why “everyone” had headed for the path – no-one had explained that to her.

Quote
We know the somewhat ludicrous reasoning that comes forth from Ms Lean.

No, you don’t. You choose to interpret information illogically to be able to make this claim

Quote
Luke was going to Judith's to help search, to go through friends phone numbers.
What friends? they were on a school trip. He would have been asked.

He would have been asked? So he says he’ll go up the path looking for Jodi on the way and Judith says no, wait, go through your phone and give me all the names and numbers of other friends she might be with before you leave? I don’t think so!

Quote
Who did Luke say or assume he would be searching with? He would have been asked.
Yet Ms Lean implies, that neither Luke or the search trio - knew each were going to search.
Ludicrous and messy.

No-one, is the simple answer. He was leaving alone and making arrangements to go to Judith’s alone, hence his mother’s insistence that he take the dog. There is no evidence whatsoever that he knew the trio were heading for the path or that they would be there when he got to the junction. They could not have got to the junction of the paths at the time they were there if they left at 11.04 – they needed 20 minutes, minimum – taking the time to 11.24 minimum and, therefore, not enough time to get down the path to the V point, three of them over the wall and the first call to the police.

Quote
But then Ms Lean believes the reconstruction went out - as the weather was the same?! Messy.

Misquote. I have never said that was the “reason” for the reconstruction. I made the point in relation to your continued claims that it was a cold, rainy, overcast day when it was not.

Quote
Leave that aside though - Luke sped up this path, he wanted to get to Judith's as quickly as possible.
Luke Mitchel should have been in Judith's well before this search trio reached Easthouses.
He was not, he simply led this search trio there.
This is why Ms Lean tries, very badly to imply the search trio left prior to Luke, she clearly states publicly (podcast) the truth.

Oh, dear, you make my point for me! He should, indeed, have been at Judith’s well before the search trio reached Easthouses. Which leaves only two options. Luke waited around on the path for 20 minutes in order to lead the trio back down the path (not possible because of the fixed time of the call to the police) or the search trio left earlier than 11.04 in order to be at the junction waiting for Luke.

Quote
Luke Mitchel was prepped and ready for that call coming through from this girls mother.
He instantly offers  to search.
He instantly goes to search this path.
He stays on this path - until the search trio arrive.
He instantly offers to use his dog to track.
They set off down together.
Less than 10mins later he is calling 999.
Luke Mitchel and only Luke could have did this in this time - only by knowing exactly where to go.
Simply not possible otherwise.
The best dogs and handlers In this world, could not have achieved this, in this time - with items to scent.
In these conditions, of being on a path and not in the woodland - cut off by a high thick wall.
No trained searcher, could have simply entered this woodland, and made this discovery in seconds.

His eagerness, his plan, his warped mind - snared in his own trap.

Evidence for any of this? You have none, it just suits your “theory” to make these claims and ignore the actual evidence that refutes it.

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2378 on: November 26, 2019, 12:41:PM »
Quote
Luke Mitchel was prepped and ready for that call coming through from this girls mother.
He instantly offers  to search.
He instantly goes to search this path.
He stays on this path - until the search trio arrive.
He instantly offers to use his dog to track.
They set off down together.
Less than 10mins later he is calling 999.
Luke Mitchel and only Luke could have did this in this time - only by knowing exactly where to go.
Simply not possible otherwise.
The best dogs and handlers In this world, could not have achieved this, in this time - with items to scent.
In these conditions, of being on a path and not in the woodland - cut off by a high thick wall.
No trained searcher, could have simply entered this woodland, and made this discovery in seconds.

His eagerness, his plan, his warped mind - snared in his own trap.

SL:
Quote
Evidence for any of this? You have none, it just suits your “theory” to make these claims and ignore the actual evidence that refutes it


Evidence:
10.49pm - call from Judith, she is going to phone the police. He offers to search.
10.50pm - call to the police.
10.52pm Luke claims to have left, after the 10.49pm call.
In this 2mins he has a conversation with his mother (debate)
He goes upstairs to speak with Shane, to ask for a torch.
Shane goes downstairs to get a torch for Luke.
Like Luke - all are very fast and very precise.
Prepped and ready indeed.
He does not look anywhere along Newbattle Road ( you picked fault with the search trio for this)
He is very instant in going to this path - he is the first person to be on this path, he is the first person
to claim to be looking on this path.
He is on/at this path by 10.59pm.

No theory there.
 
He is very fit and he is very fast, behind a very fit and very fast dog.(CM)
He goes up this path at haste. (SL)
The search trio meet - within 10mins of this meet a call is made to 999.

No theory there - or is there?

The evidence supports all of this - it is only Luke's account that disputes it.
Because Luke - claims to have sped up this path, seeing the search trio as he was approaching the
top, does not make it correct.
It simply means - as the evidence shows, that Luke was on this path first, that at this speed he should have
been off it and at Judiths.
He was not, he clearly did not speed up this path behind his very fit and fast dog at haste.
He simply held back.

Yes, IMO what evolved then is impossible, not just my opinion of course, that of the investigation.
We have witnessed over and over these rather futile claims - of dog walker finding bodies.
My point clearly is, a trained tracker and dog, could not have managed this, in this timescale,
in these conditions.
If you can prove otherwise - fine.
Which still does not show - that it is remotely possible for a claimed, partially trained pet to do so.
Ludicrous and messy.

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2379 on: November 26, 2019, 03:46:PM »
Word play - This futile bleat over time of "having all of the evidence"  to show as proof that Ms Lean does not lie.
Having all of these case files, only shows one thing - that Ms Lean has all of the case files.
Plain and simple.
To back up what exactly?
To back up that six words, extracted from a statement of more than a 1000 words is true.
Of course they are true.
Any claims put out alongside of these, hold no more weight than any other persons.
They are not proof of anything.
Only proof that they hold, is that they are selective words from multiple statements.
The arms and legs added, In an attempt to stitch them together, are just that - arms and legs.
They grow arms and legs - because these solo, one liners - make no sense in  themselves.
The rest of those 1000 words plus are required.
Reading between the lines - is the order of the day, it would seem.
The investigating team, the prosecution and the defence.
All had fair play - in reading between those lines.
The SCCRC certainly reading the lines Ms Lean and Co omitted.

Offline Davie2

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2380 on: November 26, 2019, 07:39:PM »
The fact of the matter.

Sandra will never explain away the inconsistency in the Mitchell's statements.

Sandra will never explain away why Luke was never seen on his walk home from school.

Sandra will never explain away why Shane never took the lie detector.

Sandra will never explain away the smoke in the back garden.

Sandra will never explain away why Shane & Phil have said nothing since.

Sandra will never explain away the Flemming & Walsh sighting.

Sandra will never explain away the Bryson sighting.

Sandra will never explain away the threats, physically & verbally that Luke inflicted on others.

Sandra will never explain away the jacket.

Sandra will never explain away the knife pouch.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 15527
    • 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
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2381 on: November 26, 2019, 11:52:PM »
The fact of the matter.

Sandra will never explain away the inconsistency in the Mitchell's statements.

Sandra will never explain away why Luke was never seen on his walk home from school.

Sandra will never explain away why Shane never took the lie detector.

Sandra will never explain away the smoke in the back garden.

Sandra will never explain away why Shane & Phil have said nothing since.

Sandra will never explain away the Flemming & Walsh sighting.

Sandra will never explain away the Bryson sighting.

Sandra will never explain away the threats, physically & verbally that Luke inflicted on others.

Sandra will never explain away the jacket.

Sandra will never explain away the knife pouch.

she has given explantions for all those things  weather the reader beives them or not is up to the reader.

Offline Davie2

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 234
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2382 on: November 27, 2019, 03:14:PM »
she has given explantions for all those things  weather the reader beives them or not is up to the reader.

And Luke is walking free, right? Because her explanations are so believable.

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2383 on: November 27, 2019, 04:04:PM »
Quote
You're not "simply asking questions," Parky - saying it doesn't make it true. You are also making false claims and repeating outright lies. I've made it perfectly clear, many times, very publicly, why I "started this fight." I became actively involved long before there was any "study purpose" or "book material" on the horizon (five years and four years respectively). I understand that you cannot accept that someone would fight so actively for no other reason that a burning need to challenge terrible injustice - just because you can't accept it doesn't mean it's not a fact.


"I became actively involved long before there was any "study purpose" or "book material" on the horizon (five years and four years respectively)"

Quote
"Gained substantially"? In what ways?


From around 2002/3 until gaining your doctorate - you were studying the very subject that held your interest and gathering book material.
Stating that you simply had this burning need to challenge terrible injustice - does not make it true, either.

More so Ms Lean - This very claim of terrible injustice, is how you perceive things. You are hardly Just and true in what you do.
Do you agree?
When you put out your first book, there was reference to it being recommended by the CCRC and sitting Judiciary.
Based solely it would seem - on a rather feeble email you produced, with someone stating "Thank you, the CCRC recommended your book"
The CCRC themselves, and not a third party were contacted - they denied recommending your book..
These recommendations by the CCRC were subsequently removed. The sitting Judiciary still stands, as does the book itself.
In 2008 - when all you had to go on where media reports and the word of both CM and LM.
The question was still not answered - whom, on the sitting Judiciary recommended your book?
Self praise perhaps?
 

You state, you started your PHD in 2008, the book was released in 2008, with reference to studying your PHD at Edinburgh University, rather than Stirling. Many years of study beforehand to obtain a degree and of gathering book material.
7 years by 2010 of actively being involved with injustice. Non disclosure of study material/subjects due to data protection.
It is a very fine line to claim - these two did not go hand in hand - they obviously did.

So yes, IMO and my belief, this was indeed a two way street - You did not solely fight for injustice with Luke's case or
anyone else's, you used material from these - for fighting?, for study and book material, mutually inclusive of each other.

It is no easy fete to complete all of this, many years of hard graft. You have done extremely well to gain your qualifications.
Something to be admired.
However, when pushing forward for injustice continuously - you are hardly Just in doing so.
The lies, the misleading, the misinformation - backed with ludicrous theories, is itself - a double act from both yourself and
CM. As much as you may now attempt - to distance yourself from her claims, putting them down to simple mistakes.
Both most definitely tarred with the same feather?
In simple terms - this justice you seek, you seek by backing lies?
 
These 9 years of active study in obtaining both your degree and PHD are long over. Doing well in you full time employment.
There is no back up of financial support, there are at present, one would assume no further qualification in the pipeline.
Whatever time you have now to give, is solely from your own time without personal gain. And now is the time your man
hours require payment, thus the plea for funds - to pay for your time.
Rightly so, you are fully qualified now, any work done on this case or others - needs to be met with living costs.
Have you actively stopped working or fighting on other cases now? That this payment asked for, solely to give your time to Luke's case? Or perhaps a bit of every ones? Again, killing two birds with one stone?

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #2384 on: November 28, 2019, 07:01:PM »

Harper:
Quote
Parky, can you answer the same question? What motivates you, when you already know that Luke Mitchell will not be getting out?

Luke Mitchel may very well get out - Quantum Leap there, going from the 10yrs I mentioned to "you already
know that Luke Mitchell will not be getting out"
How could I, or anyone possibly know this?

Can I answer the same question? Perhaps you should ask it again Harper.
This time by omitting the end, of what I don't already know.
That may help you to understand.
You mentioned that you had been kind enough to include Davie's, Lithium and my posts in your reading time.
The answer to your question lies there. It is relatively simple.
Once you find the answer, you may notice the time I have taken, to research one Q I had.
Why did suspicion fall upon Luke?