In my initial research on this case, I have come across Neil Wilby again, albeit tangentially. This is not the first time I have had reason to look at his site. He does good work, but there are aspects of what he does that I disagree with and will touch on here. I can't find anything by him on the Luke Mitchell case itself, but he has written about Sandra Lean and her efforts on other cases.
Dr. Lean is a central figure in this case, so for completeness, I link below to Mr Wilby's articles mentioning her - for general interest. Frankly, I think they say more about Neil Wilby than Dr. Lean. The pieces are quite long, and so to assist the reader, I was going to quote the relevant parts, but on reflection, I have decided not to, as his comments border on libel. Even the title of one of the pieces,
'Dr Truthseeker loses her moral compass', is sailing close to the wind, in my view.
It does not surprise me that Mr Wilby has a user account on the Red Forum and has posted on there (and he may well have discussed Luke Mitchell on there, I haven't checked yet). In some respects, I agree with his approach to things. For instance, I admire that he maintains his journalistic independence and does not act as a mouthpiece for campaigns as some journalists do. However, his approach is very journalistic. Reading through his articles, he falls into the trap of thinking he is judge and jury, rather than sticking strictly to the question of legal safety. This, of course, is his right. It's not a criticism, just an observation. Like most journalists (and police officers), he seems to latch on to one side or another, often for personal reasons, and interprets the facts and evidence through whatever is his adopted bias. Inevitably, he then slips into personal attacks with people who take a different view to his own, because in his eyes they are defending the interests of 'murderers' and disregarding the families of victims. Mr Wilby also has a strange idiosyncracy in his writing of occasionally referring to himself in the third person while boasting that he has established some point or other or exposed somebody.
In the case of Robin Garbutt, I understand campaigners didn't reply to his questions, so he has drawn inferences. Drawing inferences is fine, but reading through his articles on the Garbutt case, there is a definite tone of personal antagonism, which he directs at individuals connected with the campaign. He doesn't seem to appreciate that campaigners for alleged miscarriages of justice will want to put across the best possible case in public and that this is just a fact of life that has to be accepted, not an excuse to launch personal attacks on them as individuals.
I think it is likely that Mr Wilby has been a member of this Forum and has engaged with Ms. Lean on here. I do not know this, it's just a suspicion. Likely candidates are 'Dave6' and 'TheArmchairDetective'. (Note: In the latter case, I am not suggesting there is any link between that member and the current active member with a similar name).
LINKS TO THE ARTICLESNote: These links substantively concern the Robin Garbutt case. I have no particular interest in that case and I do not mean to suggest that Mr Wilby is mistaken in his conclusions about Mr Garbutt (I have no idea one way or the other); and anyway, that case should not be discussed on this sub-forum. My purpose is only to highlight his comments about a campaigner who is central to the Luke Mitchell case.
Dr Truthseeker loses her moral compasshttps://neilwilby.com/2020/06/22/dr-truthseeker-loses-her-moral-compass/A nest of vipers?https://neilwilby.com/2020/09/24/a-nest-of-vipers/Review of February 2021 (refers to Dr. Lean using scare quotes):https://neilwilby.com/2021/03/04/review-of-february-2021-on-neilwilby-com/
