Luke's Address

[snow66!]

Oh well,Steve seems to have forsaken me.Never mind my friends we will simply continue to blether away to ourselves.
So,welcome to the Snow66 Luke Mitchell chanel,where we will be free to get up to all sorts including spamming and trolling.Spam,spam,spam,troll,troll,troll,....Jane is a chancer!  Jane is a chancer!.
Oops,got carried away as usual,oh well that will be a yellow card for sure in view of the current climate.

BUT,never mind,far worse things happen at sea.

Anyway if Luke Mitchell is innocent most of our own problems pale into insignificance.But is he?
As you know,there have been other suspects put forward but for the moment we will concentrate on Luke.

Now,what I mainly want to look at for the moment is what took place in the Mitchell household from a guilty point of view on the day of the murder,the interactions between Corinne,Shane and Luke ,and see what this tells us.
OK,Luke murders Jodi and returns home at some point between 5.30 and 7.00,after that he is with his friends till around  9.00 .Now we dont know if Shane was in the house when Luke returned after the murder or just Corrine.As far as I know,Shane left about 5.30,not sure when he got back home,will check this out and comment better on this later.
Anyway,if we go by the prosecution claim that Corrine had started burning Lukes clothing by 6.30 then Luke must have been home and changed his clothes by then.Now we have already spoken about Luke telling his mum the shocking news that he had killed Jodi and a request to help him cover up the crime.

But what about later on,now I presume that Shane was home long before Jodi's mum texted Luke around 10.40 and the three of them,Corrine,Shane and Luke were frantically discussing a plan of action.
Now,by plan of action,I mean what did they think would happen next? Surely they knew that a call from Jodi's mum was imminent,now are we to believe that the trio had decided that it would be best if Luke went out and found Jodi,or did Luke decide this on his own once he left the house?

The thing is,why did Luke or his family think it was a good idea for him to be the one to find the body?
They had plenty of time to think about it,wouldn't it have been far better for Luke if Jodi wasn't found that night at all?

Isn't it more likely that Luke simply inadvertently found Jodi with the help of Mia with no thought of what the repercussions could be for this innocent action? Would he really have found the body if he was guilty?
I think he would have left Mia at home and avoided the crime scene at all costs,dont you think?

Just like Shanes witness statement,obviously all he had to do was tell the same story as Luke and his mother if everything was planned out,yet he was not sure if Luke was at home at the time of the murder or not and simply told the truth under oath as you would.
What I mean is,if Luke was guilty and Corinne and Shane aided him,why didn't they plan things out better?
You could say that Shane knew that Luke was guilty and decided not to lie for him in court,but if this was the case why not just come clean and tell the court that he knew Luke was guilty? Why just hint that he didn't know?
And if Shane does indeed know that Luke is guilty,what is the point of Luke and Corrine carrying on with their crusade without being able to count on Shanes evidence at a retrial? Pretty pointless.
Oh well,just a few more thoughts which you may wish to ponder,or sweep aside. Bye!

[Steve_uk]

I have certainly not forsaken you snow66! I have been looking online for references to Shane, which are few and far between. For example I can't find a reference to Shane leaving the house at 5:30pm as you assert.

My own view is that the three did collaborate on an alibi for Luke in the first instance. Remember Shane's first statement to police on 7 July 2003 contained the assertion that he had witnessed Luke "mashing tatties" I think this statement was given (allegedly) due to pressure from Corinne. By 14 April 2004 something had changed in the household. I suggest that Shane had told Luke and Corinne that he wasn't prepared to lie for his brother, so the truth came out that he had been watching pornography in his bedroom and would not have been engaged in that activity had someone been present in the house at the time. At trial it was confirmed that Shane was in the house at 4:55pm and his mother returned at 5:15pm. Luke claimed to be at home between 5:00pm and 5:45pm.

[snow66!]

I have certainly not forsaken you snow66! I have been looking online for references to Shane, which are few and far between. For example I can't find a reference to Shane leaving the house at 5:30pm as you assert.

My own view is that the three did collaborate on an alibi for Luke in the first instance. Remember Shane's first statement to police on 7 July 2003 contained the assertion that he had witnessed Luke "mashing tatties" I think this statement was given (allegedly) due to pressure from Corinne. By 14 April 2004 something had changed in the household. I suggest that Shane had told Luke and Corinne that he wasn't prepared to lie for his brother, so the truth came out that he had been watching pornography in his bedroom and would not have been engaged in that activity had someone been present in the house at the time. At trial it was confirmed that Shane was in the house at 4:55pm and his mother returned at 5:15pm. Luke claimed to be at home between 5:00pm and 5:45pm.

Thanks Steve,So you think that Shane was fully aware that Luke was guilty and agreed with his mother to cover for him? But then Shanes concience got the better of him and he told the truth at court,but didn't say that he KNEW Luke was guilty,he just didn't give him an alibi?
If this is the case,you could say that Shane remains neutral even if he knows Luke is guilty,and therefore if there was a re-trial would not actually aid nor hinder Luke?
But who knows,is it possible that Shane was not taken into the cover up and really did not and does not know to this day if Luke is guilty or not?
As you say Steve,there is very little info about Shane to be found.I would also like to know when he got home that night too.

As for Shane leaving the house at 5.30,this is mentioned in some of the podcasts,Sandra Leans'keeping the record straight' being one of them.

[Steve_uk]

Thanks Steve,So you think that Shane was fully aware that Luke was guilty and agreed with his mother to cover for him? But then Shanes concience got the better of him and he told the truth at court,but didn't say that he KNEW Luke was guilty,he just didn't give him an alibi?
If this is the case,you could say that Shane remains neutral even if he knows Luke is guilty,and therefore if there was a re-trial would not actually aid nor hinder Luke?
But who knows,is it possible that Shane was not taken into the cover up and really did not and does not know to this day if Luke is guilty or not?
As you say Steve,there is very little info about Shane to be found.I would also like to know when he got home that night too.

As for Shane leaving the house at 5.30,this is mentioned in some of the podcasts,Sandra Leans'keeping the record straight' being one of them.

The problem with Sandra Lean's book is that we have to take her word for almost everything. I assume she has relied heavily on Corinne as a source. Not that I'm knocking her work. As for Shane, my gut feeling is that he and Luke were not close (I may be wrong) due to the six-year age gap, and he was shocked at trial when confronted with the photographs of Jodi's mutilated body and it finally dawned on him this is what the Prosecution alleged his brother had done. I think a compromise was reached in the household that he would not categorically state Luke was not in the house at the time Jodi is purported to have been killed, but that the "mashing tatties" story would simultaneously be withdrawn.

[snow66!]

The problem with Sandra Lean's book is that we have to take her word for almost everything. I assume she has relied heavily on Corinne as a source. Not that I'm knocking her work. As for Shane, my gut feeling is that he and Luke were not close (I may be wrong) due to the seven-year age gap, and he was shocked at trial when confronted with the photographs of Jodi's mutilated body and it finally dawned on him this is what the Prosecution alleged his brother had done. I think a compromise was reached in the household that he would not categorically state Luke was not in the house at the time Jodi is purported to have been killed, but that the "mashing tatties" story would simultaneously be withdrawn.

Fair enough Steve,all quite possible.But do you think Shane knew for CERTAIN that Luke was guilty? As for Sandra Leans books,I haven't read any of them,just watched many of her podcasts.

[Steve_uk]

Fair enough Steve,all quite possible.But do you think Shane knew for CERTAIN that Luke was guilty? As for Sandra Leans books,I haven't read any of them,just watched many of her podcasts.

I think he suspected his brother might be guilty. I'd like to read Sandra Lean's books when I have time. I've watched the podcasts where the contents are summarized. A pity she doesn't post on here anymore, one presumes due to time pressures.

[snow66!]

I think he suspected his brother might be guilty. I'd like to read Sandra Lean's books when I have time. I've watched the podcasts where the contents are summarized. A pity she doesn't post on here anymore, one presumes due to time pressures.

OK Sreve,if you think Shane Mitchell 'suspected' his brother may be guilty that can only mean that he wasn't taken into Corinne and Lukes confidence on the night of the murder and maybe never has been,if Luke is indeed guilty that is.
This means Shane was not present when Luke returned home after the murder,it could only have been Corinne.Shane could not have been present when Luke entered the house with bloodied clothes and confessed to what he had done to Jodi.He could not have been present when Corinne burned the parka and other items of clothing either,else he would have known for sure that Luke was guilty,right?

Luke and Corrine must have discussed what actions to take between them and keep Shane out of the cover up,keep him in the dark as it were of Lukes involvement in the crime.
This means when Shane arrived home later in the evening on the day of the murder Luke and Corrine must have been acting as if nothing out of the ordinary had happened that day and when the phonecalls and texts took place between Luke and Jodi's mother,Luke must have acted shocked and surprised in front of Shane,yes?

So,if Shane did not witness anything suspicious or out of the ordinary that day,just what caused him to suspect Luke? It must have been the fact that when he thought things through he realized that Luke was not at home when he returned from work that day.But that adds another question,did the Mitchells lock their house door? Was a key left under a mat?

What I am getting at is who was home first that day,Luke from school or Shane from work?
That is,who unlocked the house door? Surely if Shane returned from work and the door was locked he must have known that Luke wasn't home from school or had been home and then went out again locking the door behind him?
If Shane got home from work and the house door was open surely he would take it that Luke was inside,right? Unless as I have said,that the Mitchells had a habit of leaving the house door unlocked.

The thing is,Shane may have returned from work and found the door locked,went in and headed upstairs to his bedroom thinking he was safe to use the computer,then unbeknown to Shane Luke got home and proceeded to make supper?
Anyway,I am swapping back and forth between innocence and guilt here.

As for Dr Lean Steve,I suspect she reaches a wider audience with her podcasts than posting on here anymore,and as you say she is probably up to her eyes campaigning for Luke and other potential MOJ cases.

[Faithlilly]

I have certainly not forsaken you snow66! I have been looking online for references to Shane, which are few and far between. For example I can't find a reference to Shane leaving the house at 5:30pm as you assert.

My own view is that the three did collaborate on an alibi for Luke in the first instance. Remember Shane's first statement to police on 7 July 2003 contained the assertion that he had witnessed Luke "mashing tatties" I think this statement was given (allegedly) due to pressure from Corinne. By 14 April 2004 something had changed in the household. I suggest that Shane had told Luke and Corinne that he wasn't prepared to lie for his brother, so the truth came out that he had been watching pornography in his bedroom and would not have been engaged in that activity had someone been present in the house at the time. At trial it was confirmed that Shane was in the house at 4:55pm and his mother returned at 5:15pm. Luke claimed to be at home between 5:00pm and 5:45pm.

Shane’s first statement said that he didn’t know or didn’t think that Luke was in the house when he came home. Of course if Shane had come back at his usual time Luke wouldn’t have been in the house but he came home later thus the phone call to the landline to tell Luke. Perhaps that’s where Shane’s vagueness about the afternoon stemmed from? Also could it be possible that Corrine simply reminded Shane what he had for dinner rather than pressurised him?

[snow66!]

Shane’s first statement said that he didn’t know or didn’t think that Luke was in the house when he came home. Of course if Shane had come back at his usual time Luke wouldn’t have been in the house but he came home later thus the phone call to the landline to tell Luke. Perhaps that’s where Shane’s vagueness about the afternoon stemmed from? Also could it be possible that Corrine simply reminded Shane what he had for dinner rather than pressurised him?

Hi Faithlilly,pleased to meet you.
Have you ever found much information about Shanes movements on the day of the murder? I know Sandra Lean talks of two landline calls made to the house that day,one from Lukes granny at the caravan site and one from Shane saying he would be late home I believe,although I cant remember the time of the calls,if indeed Dr Lean divulged this.
Dr Lean says it must have been Luke that answered the phone so surely this confirms that he was home before Shane anyway.
But no,I am not sure what time Shane got home from work on the day of the murder.Presumably it all came out at court,questions like, what time did you get home that day? was your brother in the house? Did you witness him coming home at some time with blood stained clothing? Did he tell you he killed Jodi? Did you help your mother to burn clothing that night?  ..and so on.I presume he answered no to most questions else it would have been an open and shut case,no?

So yes,obviously Shane must have denied in court any involvement in covering for or aiding Luke on the night of the murder.As you said Faith,it is one thing innocently mixing up with times or events of that day but another thing knowingly aiding and abbeting a murderer.

Yet,many guilters claim that Luke did indeed have a parka before the murder and than numerous witnesse's attested to this in court.The thing is it is the limited window of opportunity to carry out the murder and cover things up that gives me doubt of Mitchells guilt.
I have already asked about when Luke returned home to clean up.Some members suggest he washed in the river Esk before returning home,but this would narrow his time even further and besides he would still have to wash his clothes properly once he did get back home or burn them as claimed.

I suppose there was time to dispose of any ash or debris later that evening,but where? The woods were scoured by the police in the following days and the river was dredged by divers.And besides as I pointed out already,Jodi's body could have been found at any time,so a bit risky burning evidence at the property of her boyfriend,Corinne could have been caught in the act.
As for Luke finding the body,simply doesn't make sense if he's guilty.Although,dont they say a criminal always returns to the scene of the crime?

Anyway,having looked at the list of suspects I wouldn't be surprised if the likes of Bubo has something,suggesting that Jodi may have been murdered by an unknown experienced serial killer.
Do you have a favourite suspect Faithlilly?

[snow66!]

Shane’s first statement said that he didn’t know or didn’t think that Luke was in the house when he came home. Of course if Shane had come back at his usual time Luke wouldn’t have been in the house but he came home later thus the phone call to the landline to tell Luke. Perhaps that’s where Shane’s vagueness about the afternoon stemmed from? Also could it be possible that Corrine simply reminded Shane what he had for dinner rather than pressurised him?

Well,having read all your posts on the Luke Mitchell case now,I see you really are an expert on the case Faithlilly.
I have found the answers to many of my unanswered questions and have learned much about the crime scene and surrounding area.You truly put me to shame.

[snow66!]

I have certainly not forsaken you snow66! I have been looking online for references to Shane, which are few and far between. For example I can't find a reference to Shane leaving the house at 5:30pm as you assert.

My own view is that the three did collaborate on an alibi for Luke in the first instance. Remember Shane's first statement to police on 7 July 2003 contained the assertion that he had witnessed Luke "mashing tatties" I think this statement was given (allegedly) due to pressure from Corinne. By 14 April 2004 something had changed in the household. I suggest that Shane had told Luke and Corinne that he wasn't prepared to lie for his brother, so the truth came out that he had been watching pornography in his bedroom and would not have been engaged in that activity had someone been present in the house at the time. At trial it was confirmed that Shane was in the house at 4:55pm and his mother returned at 5:15pm. Luke claimed to be at home between 5:00pm and 5:45pm.

Well,thanks to Parky we have the full trial testimony of Shane now Steve.And as you can see,you  are right,my assertion of Shane leaving his mothers house at 5.30 is wrong,he left at 6.20.
Therefore a number of my posts will have to be updated to suit this time.

[snow66!]

OK,firstly we can see that Shane leaving the house at 6.20 ties in with one of the cycle boys seeing Luke on the street around the same time.
So,if Luke is guilty,then he was on his way home from killing Jodi at this time.
If Luke is innocent,then he left his mothers house at 5.40,walked to the gate at the end of Roans Dyke path where he was seem by Fleming and Walsh around 5.50.After Jodi did not appear he made his way back towards Newbattle Abbey Crescent where he was sighted by the bicycle boys around 6.05 then the solo biker around 6.20.He finally gave up on seeing Jodi so phoned David High to meet him.
So,if Luke is innocent,no one saw him leave his mums house at 5.40.But then no one witnessed Corrine or Shane coming or going that day either did they?? Shane 's timings were linked to the computer and phone calls and Corrine was timed by CCTV of her at the local shop at 5.03 I think it was.
So there doesn't seem to be any witnesse's to the comings and goings of anyone to the Mitchell household on the day of the murders,does there? Only a sighting of look around 9.00 o'clock wasn't there?

So,we will take it that it was possible for Luke to leave his mums house at 5.40 without being noticed and was only seen by witnesse's while loitering,shall we say at various locations.

So,not much more to say if Luke is innocent,he had his supper,went down to the Newbattle end of the path to look for Jodie before returning to the crescent where he eventually phoned his friends to meet him.
Now if Luke is guilty,we have far more to consider and go through.OK,Luke kills Jodie about 5.15,just as Corrine and Shane are meeting in the kitchen looking for their supper.As I have already pointed out,common sense tells us that a discussion about Lukes absence must surely have taken place.

Anyway,the next piece of evidence we have is Luke phoning Alan Ovens at 5.40 to tell him Jodi hadn't arrived.Now,if guilty,this call must have been made somewhere between the murder scene and the Newbattle end of the path where he was seen by fleming and Walsh around 5,50.
So we have to assume that Luke managed to keep the mobile phone free of blood,although he was probably wearing gloves during the murder anyway.
The thing is,if Luke washed up in one of the available burns or rivers,surely he would have done this before making the call to Ovens,right? So,that gives Luke 25minutes max after Luke has killed Jodi to wash up before making the call at 5.40,and wasn't there an aborted call a few minutes before that?

Anyway,I suppose Luke had time to wash by a burn and change his clothes or whatever before making the call to Ovens,that cant be denied I suppose.

Right,so,Luke has carried out the murder,cleaned up,called ovens and is making his way home.If guilty,he must be intentionally loitering so that it looks like he is waiting for someone.That takes us right back to 6.20 when Shane is leaving for the evening and Luke is seen sitting on a wall by the bike boy who had the burst tyre.
So what happened next??

Well,we know Shane must have left before Luke made it back home,and we also know that Luke met up with High around seven o'clock.And wasn't there another sighting of Luke around 6.35?? If so,that leaves under half an hour for Luke to go home and wash,tell his mother to burn the parka and arrange an alibi.
 
We will discuss what happened from 6.30 onwards in the next post.

[Steve_uk]

OK,firstly we can see that Shane leaving the house at 6.20 ties in with one of the cycle boys seeing Luke on the street around the same time.
So,if Luke is guilty,then he was on his way home from killing Jodi at this time.
If Luke is innocent,then he left his mothers house at 5.40,walked to the gate at the end of Roans Dyke path where he was seem by Fleming and Walsh around 5.50.After Jodi did not appear he made his way back towards Newbattle Abbey Crescent where he was sighted by the bicycle boys around 6.05 then the solo biker around 6.20.He finally gave up on seeing Jodi so phoned David High to meet him.
So,if Luke is innocent,no one saw him leave his mums house at 5.40.But then no one witnessed Corrine or Shane coming or going that day either did they?? Shane 's timings were linked to the computer and phone calls and Corrine was timed by CCTV of her at the local shop at 5.03 I think it was.
So there doesn't seem to be any witnesse's to the comings and goings of anyone to the Mitchell household on the day of the murders,does there? Only a sighting of look around 9.00 o'clock wasn't there?

So,we will take it that it was possible for Luke to leave his mums house at 5.40 without being noticed and was only seen by witnesse's while loitering,shall we say at various locations.

So,not much more to say if Luke is innocent,he had his supper,went down to the Newbattle end of the path to look for Jodie before returning to the crescent where he eventually phoned his friends to meet him.
Now if Luke is guilty,we have far more to consider and go through.OK,Luke kills Jodie about 5.15,just as Corrine and Shane are meeting in the kitchen looking for their supper.As I have already pointed out,common sense tells us that a discussion about Lukes absence must surely have taken place.

Anyway,the next piece of evidence we have is Luke phoning Alan Ovens at 5.40 to tell him Jodi hadn't arrived.Now,if guilty,this call must have been made somewhere between the murder scene and the Newbattle end of the path where he was seen by fleming and Walsh around 5,50.
So we have to assume that Luke managed to keep the mobile phone free of blood,although he was probably wearing gloves during the murder anyway.
The thing is,if Luke washed up in one of the available burns or rivers,surely he would have done this before making the call to Ovens,right? So,that gives Luke 25minutes max after Luke has killed Jodi to wash up before making the call at 5.40,and wasn't there an aborted call a few minutes before that?

Anyway,I suppose Luke had time to wash by a burn and change his clothes or whatever before making the call to Ovens,that cant be denied I suppose.

Right,so,Luke has carried out the murder,cleaned up,called ovens and is making his way home.If guilty,he must be intentionally loitering so that it looks like he is waiting for someone.That takes us right back to 6.20 when Shane is leaving for the evening and Luke is seen sitting on a wall by the bike boy who had the burst tyre.
So what happened next??

Well,we know Shane must have left before Luke made it back home,and we also know that Luke met up with High around seven o'clock.And wasn't there another sighting of Luke around 6.35?? If so,that leaves under half an hour for Luke to go home and wash,tell his mother to burn the parka and arrange an alibi.
 
We will discuss what happened from 6.30 onwards in the next post.

So he wasn't concerned about her welfare at all for several hours? This after she had been grounded by her mother for smoking weed, so would be excited to meet up with him again.

[snow66!]

So he wasn't concerned about her welfare at all for several hours? This after she had been grounded by her mother for smoking weed, so would be excited to meet up with him again.

Well,if innocent,that is indeed what happened Steve.
And again,it is worth mentioning that no one saw Luke returning home to his mothers house around 6.30 if he is guilty.Did they??

[snow66!]

Oh yes,Luke phoned David High at 6.35.So he did a lot between 6.20 and 7.00.if guilty.
Was he already home when he phoned High? Unlikely,Luke surely wouldn't go home and say..'Hi,mum,Ive just killed Jodi,I'll tell you about it in a minute after I've phoned David High to meet me at the Abbey!...

No no,he must have arranged to meet High before he went home,and this was before he knew what his mums reaction to the murder was going to be.So here's the situation,Luke has just killed Jodi and on the way back home has arranged to meet his friends within half an hour, before entering his mothers house.

Does this ring true? Of course it doesn't.Luke is essentially giving himself 25 minutes to sort things out with his mother including the time it takes to walk to the Abbey.
Why didn't Luke sort things out FIRST with his mother,alibi etc., before phoning High? Makes no sense.
If innocent of course,then Luke DIDN'T GO HOME AGAIN after phoning High to arrange anything.
Now THAT makes sense,total sense!!
Luke left his mothers house at 5.40 and didn't return till around 9.00.
I think the call to High at 6.35 is a BIG point in Lukes favour. Just think about it!!