Author Topic: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones  (Read 77976 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1800 on: December 03, 2019, 11:54:PM »
Quote
No-one, yet, has been able to come up with a single, credible reason why I would lie or mislead. I had no connection to either family before Jodi was murdered, I live in the local community as did my children for many years - why would I risk getting a murderer of the hook by lying and misleading, knowing that he would be coming back into the community where I and my children lived our lives?


You have answered your own question in part.
The lies, the misleading and misrepresentation of facts - pose no risk in getting a murderer off the hook
They stand for nothing, they are not evidence - They do not and never will, gain Luke Mitchell freedom.
So the relevant question is not why would I - but why do you?

Offline marty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 463
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1801 on: December 04, 2019, 10:39:AM »
No examples then.

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1802 on: December 04, 2019, 03:39:PM »
Marty;

You have made it abundantly clear that my posts are "totties", still to fathom what this means.
I'll take a guess here and assume it is not complimentary.
Amongst numerous posts I have put forward - there lies some of these examples.
Now perhaps would be a good time to read them, if you can be bothered of course.
I will however take the time to give you a handful of examples, from the list of 47 I have, to date.
 

Here, is a post that someone made, in response to Ms Leans podcast.
Tell me if you believe this to be a lie, misleading or blatant misrepresentation of the facts, that Ms Lean put out?
That warranted the following response;

Quote
I am shocked that the police took a polaroid photo of Luke Mitchell and showed only that photo to a witness.
This is not allowed and police should have shown a selection of photographs.
What they did was suggestive and leading.
.
We know of course that AB was shown 12 pictures not just one - it was a photo identification process.
Now for this, it is irrelevant how a person may feel about these 12 pictures.
Is this a lie, misleading, blatant misrepresentation of the facts?
The truth, the fact is, she was shown 12 pictures.
Used to imply that AB was shown one picture only - it worked with the above poster.
 

Both CM and Ms Lean state that the search trio "had to walk passed YW's whilst heading directly to the path"
Is this a lie, misleading, blatant misrepresentation of the facts?

The relevant point, is not - what these two feel this search trio should have done, the relevant point is the blatant misrepresentation of facts.
That fact is, the truth is - they did not have to walk passed here, they would have had to walk backwards to do so.
Used, to imply this search trio, should have popped in to this lady's house whilst walking passed it. 


"The search trio had to come from the top of Mayfield"
Is this a lie, misleading, blatant misrepresentation of the facts?
The truth is, the fact is - this search trio came from a bottom end of Mayfield.
Used to imply this search trio had much further to walk.
 

"SK was only alibied by his girlfriend JaJ."
Is this a lie, misleading, blatant misrepresentation of the facts?
The truth, the fact is, SK was in the company of both his girlfriend and father.

Quote
"Several witnesses were identified as having been on the path at the critical time that evening. In total there were a minimum of five – John Ferris, Gordon Dickie, his father, David Dickie, Stephen Kelly, a witness who claimed to have heard a disturbance behind the wall, and the "mystery man" seen following Jodi onto the path. Yet of the four who have spoken to police, none makes any mention of having seen either Luke or"
Is this a lie, misleading, blatant misrepresentation of the facts?

Ms Lean explained this away - claiming that all she had to go on, were, media reports and court transcripts.
And the word of both Luke and Corinne Mitchell.
Was that a lie, misleading, blatant misrepresentation of the facts, as;
In this very same book, we have;

Quote
"Careful examination of these statements, however, reveals that crucial aspects of them cannot possibly be true."


Therefore Marty - around my various pieces of written work, It interests me, as to what motivates a person - repeatedly;
To lie, to mislead and blatantly misinform people.
Amidst these studies - I have gained further insight into this case, and realise, fundamentally, why suspicion upon Luke, fell.
I have come to a conclusion, in part - as to why these lies and so forth, are pushed out - in this case.
That there is little, in the way of actual evidence - to prove that Luke is innocent.
Therefore the above - may be used for multiple purpose, but only the perpetrators, know the truth behind their own reasoning.
Only they know the answer.
Unfortunately - is this claimed search for the truth, for Justice - the truth itself is not being put forward. Is this Just, to do so?.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1803 on: December 05, 2019, 08:37:AM »
Information about the leading nature of the photographs shown to Andrina Bryson has been in the public domain since 2008. Top experts have commented on how misleading the photo spread was -John Scott, for example, said they didn’t have an arrow pointing to his head, but they may as well have done. Was John Scott lying, misleading or blatantly misrepresenting the facts?

Did they check Yvonne’s flat to see if Jodi was there? No, they didn’t. Had Jodi been found in Yvonne’s flat previously when she was not where she was supposed to be? Yes, she had. Was Janine sent to walk the couple of minutes to Yvonne’s to see if Jodi was there on previous occasions? Yes, she was. So why not that night? Why not, since they were out anyway, take the couple of minutes to check the flat?

I have repeatedly put out the police timings for the walk from Alice’s house to the junction of the paths and the V point – the length of time that walk took is a fact that matters. If Luke was at the Newbattle end of the path at 10.59 and this family didn’t leave Alice’s house until 11.05 at the earliest, they could not have been at the junction of the paths prior to 11.25pm FACT.

Quote
"SK was only alibied by his girlfriend JaJ."
The truth, the fact is, SK was in the company of both his girlfriend and father.

Until 2014, that claim was not made known to the defence. Why not?

Quote
"Several witnesses were identified as having been on the path at the critical time that evening. In total there were a minimum of five – John Ferris, Gordon Dickie, his father, David Dickie, Stephen Kelly, a witness who claimed to have heard a disturbance behind the wall, and the "mystery man" seen following Jodi onto the path. Yet of the four who have spoken to police, none makes any mention of having seen either Luke or"
Is this a lie, misleading, blatant misrepresentation of the facts?

That was a typo for which I apologised and took immediate steps to correct. No lie, no blatant misrepresentation, a simple error.

Quote
I have come to a conclusion, in part - as to why these lies and so forth, are pushed out - in this case…. but only the perpetrators, know the truth behind their own reasoning.
Only they know the answer.

So what is your conclusion, Parky? Just because you choose to interpret information as lies, misleading or “blatant misrepresentation” doesn’t make it so.

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1804 on: December 05, 2019, 11:28:AM »
Sandra L
Quote
Information about the leading nature of the photographs shown to Andrina Bryson has been in the public domain since 2008. Top experts have commented on how misleading the photo spread was -John Scott, for example, said they didn’t have an arrow pointing to his head, but they may as well have done. Was John Scott lying, misleading or blatantly misrepresenting the facts?

Ms Lean, yet again, shimmies away from the point - the point being, that this campaign is wrought with lies and misleading information.
Ignores what I have said completely - highlights John Scott, who is not being misleading, as he is discussing the 12 pictures.
And it is ok for Ms Lean to lie and mislead - as the information is available to the public?
So it is OK to lie - people can see the truth elsewhere, if they can be bothered.
Therefore the lies matter not - no harm done?
Messy.

Sandra L
Quote
Did they check Yvonne’s flat to see if Jodi was there? No, they didn’t. Had Jodi been found in Yvonne’s flat previously when she was not where she was supposed to be? Yes, she had. Was Janine sent to walk the couple of minutes to Yvonne’s to see if Jodi was there on previous occasions? Yes, she was. So why not that night? Why not, since they were out anyway, take the couple of minutes to check the flat?

And again - completely ignores the point.
Of the blatant lies being told by both Ms Lean and CM.
And gives her opinion instead, of what she FEELS should have happened.
Thus believing her lies are justified?
The lie being "That the search trio HAD to walk passed YW's whilst heading DIRECTLY to the path"

Sandra L
Quote
I have repeatedly put out the police timings for the walk from Alice’s house to the junction of the paths and the V point – the length of time that walk took is a fact that matters. If Luke was at the Newbattle end of the path at 10.59 and this family didn’t leave Alice’s house until 11.05 at the earliest, they could not have been at the junction of the paths prior to 11.25pm FACT.

And again - excuses the lies, justifies them on behalf of CM.
The lie is "That the search trio had to walk from the top of Mayfield"
The relevant point - is the lies.
That the people campaigning for innocence.
Are lying.
Messy. 

Parky41:
Quote
"SK was only alibied by his girlfriend JaJ."
The truth, the fact is, SK was in the company of both his girlfriend and father.


Quote
Until 2014, that claim was not made known to the defence. Why not?

Rubbish: Let us digest and dissect that a little.
First of all, POA, does not excuse Ms Lean from being - overtly defensive of Luke, to the point of lying repeatedly.
Putting herself in the shoes, of being his defence does not equate to - "that claim was not made known to the defence"
Let us step back to 2004-5.
SK, his statements.
JaJ, her statements.
Mr K - his statement.
The defence - Findlay and Co.
Access to these statements.
Precognitions.
The SCCRC.
So whilst Ms Lean claims - not to have actually read this fathers statement.
It does not equate to the defence not being aware of this alibi.
Is Ms Lean, yet again, simply excusing herself here - from those very lies.
Caught in her own web of deceit.
More so - even IF Ms Lean did not read this statement until 2014 it is 2019.
CM also - still lying for 5yrs at least?
Messy.



Sandra L - No Smoke:
Quote
Quote
"Several witnesses were identified as having been on the path at the critical time that evening. In total there were a minimum of five – John Ferris, Gordon Dickie, his father, David Dickie, Stephen Kelly, a witness who claimed to have heard a disturbance behind the wall, and the "mystery man" seen following Jodi onto the path. Yet of the four who have spoken to police, none makes any mention of having seen either Luke or"
Is this a lie, misleading, blatant misrepresentation of the facts?

Sandra L:
Quote
That was a typo for which I apologised and took immediate steps to correct. No lie, no blatant misrepresentation, a simple error.
[/color]

And yet again, excusing herself as this being a simple error, typo.
The typo may be - SK rather than LK.--a typo of several letters not one of course. Very odd typo.
David Dickie was not on this path at the crucial time - the crucial time, being between 5 and 5.30pm.
The mystery man was not seen following Jodi onto this path.
And completely ignores the reason (lie perhaps) she gave before for this.
Of this being prior to having the case papers, of becoming POA.
In this very same chapter of the book - she refers to reading the case papers.
The statements.
Messy.

Parky41:
Quote
I have come to a conclusion, in part - as to why these lies and so forth, are pushed out - in this case…. but only the perpetrators, know the truth behind their own reasoning
.

Sandra L:
Quote
So what is your conclusion, Parky? Just because you choose to interpret information as lies, misleading or “blatant misrepresentation” doesn’t make it so.


And again - only Ms Lean and Ms Mitchel will know the reasons behind these lies, behind those blatant misrepresentations of the facts.
For that is what they are - no interpretation needed.

Offline marty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 463
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1805 on: December 06, 2019, 07:19:AM »
So after sifting through 16years of someones work trying to catch them out, this utter pish is all you can come up with in your writings😂😂😂. Idont know what or who your supposed to be but how long have you wasted on that muck.
You cant win the arguement mate so turning you venom to hate. Just for the record nearly everyposter on here has admitted to not reading your posts at some point wonder why? I have just wasted my time on points that have been answered time and time again. But not from professor parky of course.

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1806 on: December 12, 2019, 07:29:PM »
Marty:

Perhaps a simple thank you would have been more appropriate.
I do however agree, that these lies, blatant misrepresentation of facts, are indeed - "utter pish"
Whilst is may be admiral, to jump, to only Ms Leans defence in your attack upon myself personally, not just my post.
Reading through these forums, online evidence and so forth - has been a far cry from sifting through 16rs of Ms Leans work.
The lies and so forth, in abundance from these alone - plain for all to see, if they take the time.
One therefore dreads to imagine, how much more there is - amongst those 16yrs of actual work.
Such strong, personal words to use of "venom to hate" towards someone, who has highlighted some of these.
One's time would be better served, checking what they post - prior to joining forces, of promoting lies and misinformation.
Just a suggestion, of course.
No arguments to be won Marty, how petty and somewhat futile to enter into some form of game play, of scoring points.
It matters not who may read what I post Marty - it does however matter from the campaigners side, who may read or listen to them.
Perhaps the reason why this campaign has gotten no-where, when it is founded upon lies, blanket misinformation.
Those very people who seek truth and Justice are neither truthful or Just in their actions, do you not feel that is wrong? That something is amiss?
Silly question really - when you, yourself have treated people unjustly, an innocent man from a funeral directors, being but one.
If you, were truly just the messenger of this "slipped, cat out of the bag info" Do you feel you were being used Marty?
Someone to pedal their wares, so to speak.- wares in the form of misinformation, lies?
Coughing up this coffin information - mistakenly, coughing up "utter pish" to boot?
Flying with the craws Marty?
Yet to see any explanation for the lies Marty - just some steadfast shimmying around them.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1807 on: December 25, 2019, 08:08:AM »
Happy Christmas, Lithium (and everyone else). I hope you have a day surrounded with friends, family, love and laughter and find a space in your heart to appreciate just how precious that is.

Thinking of all of those with an empty space at the table and those with no table at all. Those of us able to post here are so incredibly lucky and blessed - today is a good day to remember with gratitude.

Hope everyone has a lovely time!

Offline Steve_uk

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17935
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1808 on: December 25, 2019, 01:47:PM »
Happy Christmas, Lithium (and everyone else). I hope you have a day surrounded with friends, family, love and laughter and find a space in your heart to appreciate just how precious that is.

Thinking of all of those with an empty space at the table and those with no table at all. Those of us able to post here are so incredibly lucky and blessed - today is a good day to remember with gratitude.

Hope everyone has a lovely time!
Thank you Sandra and likewise to you and yours.

Offline marty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 463
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1809 on: December 25, 2019, 02:59:PM »
Marty:

Perhaps a simple thank you would have been more appropriate.
I do however agree, that these lies, blatant misrepresentation of facts, are indeed - "utter pish"
Whilst is may be admiral, to jump, to only Ms Leans defence in your attack upon myself personally, not just my post.
Reading through these forums, online evidence and so forth - has been a far cry from sifting through 16rs of Ms Leans work.
The lies and so forth, in abundance from these alone - plain for all to see, if they take the time.
One therefore dreads to imagine, how much more there is - amongst those 16yrs of actual work.
Such strong, personal words to use of "venom to hate" towards someone, who has highlighted some of these.
One's time would be better served, checking what they post - prior to joining forces, of promoting lies and misinformation.
Just a suggestion, of course.
No arguments to be won Marty, how petty and somewhat futile to enter into some form of game play, of scoring points.
It matters not who may read what I post Marty - it does however matter from the campaigners side, who may read or listen to them.
Perhaps the reason why this campaign has gotten no-where, when it is founded upon lies, blanket misinformation.
Those very people who seek truth and Justice are neither truthful or Just in their actions, do you not feel that is wrong? That something is amiss?
Silly question really - when you, yourself have treated people unjustly, an innocent man from a funeral directors, being but one.
If you, were truly just the messenger of this "slipped, cat out of the bag info" Do you feel you were being used Marty?
Someone to pedal their wares, so to speak.- wares in the form of misinformation, lies?
Coughing up this coffin information - mistakenly, coughing up "utter pish" to boot?
Flying with the craws Marty?
Yet to see any explanation for the lies Marty - just some steadfast shimmying around them.

Professor parky🤗🤗🤗

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1810 on: June 19, 2020, 11:36:AM »
Has Sandra attempted to link Christian Brueckner to the murder yet?

LOL


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
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1811 on: June 19, 2020, 11:41:AM »
Has Sandra attempted to link Christian Brueckner to the murder yet?


hello lithum good to see you agian.


Offline WakeyWakey

  • Junior Member
  • **
  • Posts: 76
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1812 on: June 25, 2020, 01:36:PM »
coming up to that time o year again.

what wil it be this time? Patreon exclusive interview subscriber only  £5 a month? determined to make a career of this she is

Offline David1819

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 12617
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1813 on: June 25, 2020, 04:22:PM »
coming up to that time o year again.

what wil it be this time? Patreon exclusive interview subscriber only  £5 a month? determined to make a career of this she is

When will we get the other half of that documentary?

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
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1814 on: June 25, 2020, 06:14:PM »
When will we get the other half of that documentary?

i dontknowithinkitmay ofgone the same way as your forensic breakthrough.