Luke's Address

[snow66!]

And if Luke is guilty when the heck was Shane taken into the cover-up?? He didn't get home again till 9.55.
A lot more to discuss and try to make sense of.

What about Corrine,she's told the awful news then simply left to stew for two hours while Luke is out swinging on a Tarzan rope with his friends! Amazing!
Oh well,I suppose she had clothes to burn and what not.

[Bubo bubo]

And if Luke is guilty when the heck was Shane taken into the cover-up?? He didn't get home again till 9.55.
A lot more to discuss and try to make sense of.

I have long been of the belief that LM is innocent. In my investigations I looked at the MO of the killer and tried to find an alternative to LM. My candidate is Danilo Restivo. He is now a convicted murderer. The warped nature of his crimes strongly suggests that he could have been 'Stocky man'. I have a lot of evidence to back this up but unfortunately do not have the time to get involved. Those who think LM innocent should investigate this guy as an alternate perpetrator.

As they say on University Challenge here is your starter for ten

IS IT WORTH A CHECK

Where EXACTLY was Danilo Restivo on the evening of 30/06/03?

Similarities between the Heather Barnett murder (12/11/2002) and that of Jodie Jones (30/06/2003).

1 Head wounds; both had blunt force injuries to the back of the head with no weapon found, though a hammer was attributed in HB’s case. However the pathologist in the Jones case said it could also have been made by forcing her head against something hard like a wall.

2 Neck wounds; both suffered massive mutilation injuries with a bladed weapon to the neck area almost severing the head.

3 Breast area; both had been mutilated in this area. Barnett’s were fully removed. Jones’s left breast had been attacked.

4 Both crime scenes had evidence of a struggle before death.

5 Clothes; both victims had their clothes cut off.

6 Elements of symmetry/quirkiness; it is said that HB’s incised breasts were placed either side of her head. Jodie’s brassiere cups were placed one inside the other.

7 Hair; HB had some of her hair placed by one hand with the hair of another woman next to the other. Jodie had some of her hair pulled out and some of her hair was around her fingers. The uncovered body overnight with rain may be a factor either as a cause or adjuster of volume or positioning. It seems to me from pictures that all three women had auburn hair.

Danilo Restivo tied up his first victim the Italian Alisa Claps and Jodie was tied up. He was also suspected of tying up two children and cutting one with a knife. Settled out of court in Italy when he was younger.

Alisa Claps only had her own hair by the body.

The attack on Jodie is more severe but with some deranged killers the violence escalates a bit each time.

Danilo Restivo and his actions

Any study I suggest would conclude that he was a stalker, he was cunning, he planned meticulously especially when constructing an alibi and he was extremely DNA savvy. The Bournemouth Echo has full trial coverage and gives a lot of details. He equipped himself with duplicate clothing. He had a balaclava gloves and scissors when stopped while under close surveillance. He was wearing a black hoodie and waterproof trousers. He has thick black hair and looks stocky to podgy in photos.

His initial alibi for the HB murder was well constructed and included falsifying workplace logs.
An Italian case observer said he was taunting police saying in effect catch me if you can.
Questions arising

What detail of the HB murder was in the public domain prior to Jodie’s murder that could have facilitated a copycat/similar MO?

When did the Dorset police last have contact with Restivo and was he under any kind of surveillance prior to the close surveillance which commenced March 2004? If so what form did it take and what if any records were kept?

What event triggered the close surveillance?

When he was questioned was he (a) under arrest (b) questioned under caution or (c) merely questioned as part of general enquiries? When exactly is mid 2003?

Did Dorset police at any time inform other police forces (in England, Wales and Scotland) of the nature of the HB murder and ask them to report any similar MO.

Did Dorset police again notify other forces at any time that Restivo was on their patch or that they had lost track of him and they should keep a lookout for this person of interest?

The biggest question is; do any of the four unattributed male partial DNA samples match Restivo’s dna?
Is it worth a check?

I have removed all my opinions and speculations since if the result is negative, whilst not removing him entirely as a potential suspect, other avenue would need to be explored such as a partner.

It is an area where most people think that the perp was a local but that may not be the case.

[snow66!]

I have long been of the belief that LM is innocent. In my investigations I looked at the MO of the killer and tried to find an alternative to LM. My candidate is Danilo Restivo. He is now a convicted murderer. The warped nature of his crimes strongly suggests that he could have been 'Stocky man'. I have a lot of evidence to back this up but unfortunately do not have the time to get involved. Those who think LM innocent should investigate this guy as an alternate perpetrator.

As they say on University Challenge here is your starter for ten

IS IT WORTH A CHECK

Where EXACTLY was Danilo Restivo on the evening of 30/06/03?

Similarities between the Heather Barnett murder (12/11/2002) and that of Jodie Jones (30/06/2003).

1 Head wounds; both had blunt force injuries to the back of the head with no weapon found, though a hammer was attributed in HB’s case. However the pathologist in the Jones case said it could also have been made by forcing her head against something hard like a wall.

2 Neck wounds; both suffered massive mutilation injuries with a bladed weapon to the neck area almost severing the head.

3 Breast area; both had been mutilated in this area. Barnett’s were fully removed. Jones’s left breast had been attacked.

4 Both crime scenes had evidence of a struggle before death.

5 Clothes; both victims had their clothes cut off.

6 Elements of symmetry/quirkiness; it is said that HB’s incised breasts were placed either side of her head. Jodie’s brassiere cups were placed one inside the other.

7 Hair; HB had some of her hair placed by one hand with the hair of another woman next to the other. Jodie had some of her hair pulled out and some of her hair was around her fingers. The uncovered body overnight with rain may be a factor either as a cause or adjuster of volume or positioning. It seems to me from pictures that all three women had auburn hair.

Danilo Restivo tied up his first victim the Italian Alisa Claps and Jodie was tied up. He was also suspected of tying up two children and cutting one with a knife. Settled out of court in Italy when he was younger.

Alisa Claps only had her own hair by the body.

The attack on Jodie is more severe but with some deranged killers the violence escalates a bit each time.

Danilo Restivo and his actions

Any study I suggest would conclude that he was a stalker, he was cunning, he planned meticulously especially when constructing an alibi and he was extremely DNA savvy. The Bournemouth Echo has full trial coverage and gives a lot of details. He equipped himself with duplicate clothing. He had a balaclava gloves and scissors when stopped while under close surveillance. He was wearing a black hoodie and waterproof trousers. He has thick black hair and looks stocky to podgy in photos.

His initial alibi for the HB murder was well constructed and included falsifying workplace logs.
An Italian case observer said he was taunting police saying in effect catch me if you can.
Questions arising

What detail of the HB murder was in the public domain prior to Jodie’s murder that could have facilitated a copycat/similar MO?

When did the Dorset police last have contact with Restivo and was he under any kind of surveillance prior to the close surveillance which commenced March 2004? If so what form did it take and what if any records were kept?

What event triggered the close surveillance?

When he was questioned was he (a) under arrest (b) questioned under caution or (c) merely questioned as part of general enquiries? When exactly is mid 2003?

Did Dorset police at any time inform other police forces (in England, Wales and Scotland) of the nature of the HB murder and ask them to report any similar MO.

Did Dorset police again notify other forces at any time that Restivo was on their patch or that they had lost track of him and they should keep a lookout for this person of interest?

The biggest question is; do any of the four unattributed male partial DNA samples match Restivo’s dna?
Is it worth a check?

I have removed all my opinions and speculations since if the result is negative, whilst not removing him entirely as a potential suspect, other avenue would need to be explored such as a partner.

It is an area where most people think that the perp was a local but that may not be the case.

Thanks very much Bubo,will check all this out.
If you go through all my posts you will find that I agreed with you that it may have been an opportunist serial killer.
Scott Forbes put forward the possibility that it may have been the Roslyn chapel murderer if that means anything to you,I cant remember his name.
Anyway,there is certainly room for doubt about Mitchells guilt as far as I can see.

[Parky41]

The problem with the stocky man is that there were no confirmed, positive identifications made of Jodi Jones around 5pm walking along the Easthouses road. It had been an appeal put out in the paper of the first positive "possible" sighting of her on that road. We know that SL applies he just disappeared from the investigation - Not so at all, is it? Certainly that whatever transpired after the appeal brought this to a halt, as in it was not the young girl around the 5pm mark that day. If there had have been, it would have been used to show her last movements.

Sense over fallacy? - What SL is actually saying, is that there was nothing of the follow up on this male within LM's defence papers. Why would there have been? DF, who sourced and scoured every media report in the lead up to the trial, using many from this at the trial. Without a doubt accessed and gained everything he could of that possible sighting. He did use it at the trial, as in the actual media report itself, why?

JF had cut his hair, DF was attempting to infer that he had read the article, panicked should people think he was this stocky male mentioned in the article. The description of his hair. Ludicrous of course, JF could never have been applied as stocky. Not the brightest spark, the AD when cross examining him asked him, 'If you were here you could not have been there?' "Dunno?"

That aside - There was no forensic evidence found of any altercation taken place bar that bottom area within that woodland strip. Indicative of the young girl walking down through there with someone she knew. There was no reason for the young girl to have been wandering in there alone, and certainly not with someone closely behind her! It led to nowhere, thus, hardly likely that any opportunist would be waiting in an area off the beaten track on anyone passing by? The girl had a ban in place on using the path alone, she had no phone, why would she have wandered into an even more secluded area for no reason, alone. We see this from AW's testimony, that she would never have thought of Jodi being in the woodland, nor of anyone getting her in there against her will.

The killer had hidden her body, why would an opportunist needed to have done that? Again, indicative of someone needing time on their side? Not to say that opportunist don't do this, but that is usually around the hope of never being discovered. This was different, it was not an area where it was unlikely a discovery would never be made.

Again, we are left with clear reason why LM was suspect - There had been a sighting and a positive ID of him, this did take place at the young couples normal meeting place. She was killed in a stretch of woodland they also frequented together. She had made contact with no one else, had not means to contact anyone else after leaving home. There had been restrictions in place on when she had been allowed out, he was the only who could have learnt of this being lifted after school that day, bringing any potential, later meeting, forward. No signs of any altercation taken place outwith that area, of walking amicably into an area off the beaten track with someone she knew?   

[snow66!]

The problem with the stocky man is that there were no confirmed, positive identifications made of Jodi Jones around 5pm walking along the Easthouses road. It had been an appeal put out in the paper of the first positive "possible" sighting of her on that road. We know that SL applies he just disappeared from the investigation - Not so at all, is it? Certainly that whatever transpired after the appeal brought this to a halt, as in it was not the young girl around the 5pm mark that day. If there had have been, it would have been used to show her last movements.

Sense over fallacy? - What SL is actually saying, is that there was nothing of the follow up on this male within LM's defence papers. Why would there have been? DF, who sourced and scoured every media report in the lead up to the trial, using many from this at the trial. Without a doubt accessed and gained everything he could of that possible sighting. He did use it at the trial, as in the actual media report itself, why?

JF had cut his hair, DF was attempting to infer that he had read the article, panicked should people think he was this stocky male mentioned in the article. The description of his hair. Ludicrous of course, JF could never have been applied as stocky. Not the brightest spark, the AD when cross examining him asked him, 'If you were here you could not have been there?' "Dunno?"

That aside - There was no forensic evidence found of any altercation taken place bar that bottom area within that woodland strip. Indicative of the young girl walking down through there with someone she knew. There was no reason for the young girl to have been wandering in there alone, and certainly not with someone closely behind her! It led to nowhere, thus, hardly likely that any opportunist would be waiting in an area off the beaten track on anyone passing by? The girl had a ban in place on using the path alone, she had no phone, why would she have wandered into an even more secluded area for no reason, alone. We see this from AW's testimony, that she would never have thought of Jodi being in the woodland, nor of anyone getting her in there against her will.

The killer had hidden her body, why would an opportunist needed to have done that? Again, indicative of someone needing time on their side? Not to say that opportunist don't do this, but that is usually around the hope of never being discovered. This was different, it was not an area where it was unlikely a discovery would never be made.

Again, we are left with clear reason why LM was suspect - There had been a sighting and a positive ID of him, this did take place at the young couples normal meeting place. She was killed in a stretch of woodland they also frequented together. She had made contact with no one else, had not means to contact anyone else after leaving home. There had been restrictions in place on when she had been allowed out, he was the only who could have learnt of this being lifted after school that day, bringing any potential, later meeting, forward. No signs of any altercation taken place outwith that area, of walking amicably into an area off the beaten track with someone she knew?

You put your case across well Parky,I for one will ponder over everything you have pointed out.
Can you confirm that Luke phoned David High at 6.35?

[nugnug]

The problem with the stocky man is that there were no confirmed, positive identifications made of Jodi Jones around 5pm walking along the Easthouses road. It had been an appeal put out in the paper of the first positive "possible" sighting of her on that road. We know that SL applies he just disappeared from the investigation - Not so at all, is it? Certainly that whatever transpired after the appeal brought this to a halt, as in it was not the young girl around the 5pm mark that day. If there had have been, it would have been used to show her last movements.

Sense over fallacy? - What SL is actually saying, is that there was nothing of the follow up on this male within LM's defence papers. Why would there have been? DF, who sourced and scoured every media report in the lead up to the trial, using many from this at the trial. Without a doubt accessed and gained everything he could of that possible sighting. He did use it at the trial, as in the actual media report itself, why?

JF had cut his hair, DF was attempting to infer that he had read the article, panicked should people think he was this stocky male mentioned in the article. The description of his hair. Ludicrous of course, JF could never have been applied as stocky. Not the brightest spark, the AD when cross examining him asked him, 'If you were here you could not have been there?' "Dunno?"

That aside - There was no forensic evidence found of any altercation taken place bar that bottom area within that woodland strip. Indicative of the young girl walking down through there with someone she knew. There was no reason for the young girl to have been wandering in there alone, and certainly not with someone closely behind her! It led to nowhere, thus, hardly likely that any opportunist would be waiting in an area off the beaten track on anyone passing by? The girl had a ban in place on using the path alone, she had no phone, why would she have wandered into an even more secluded area for no reason, alone. We see this from AW's testimony, that she would never have thought of Jodi being in the woodland, nor of anyone getting her in there against her will.

The killer had hidden her body, why would an opportunist needed to have done that? Again, indicative of someone needing time on their side? Not to say that opportunist don't do this, but that is usually around the hope of never being discovered. This was different, it was not an area where it was unlikely a discovery would never be made.

Again, we are left with clear reason why LM was suspect - There had been a sighting and a positive ID of him, this did take place at the young couples normal meeting place. She was killed in a stretch of woodland they also frequented together. She had made contact with no one else, had not means to contact anyone else after leaving home. There had been restrictions in place on when she had been allowed out, he was the only who could have learnt of this being lifted after school that day, bringing any potential, later meeting, forward. No signs of any altercation taken place outwith that area, of walking amicably into an area off the beaten track with someone she knew?

yes there is the police made a reconstruction of her doing it

[snow66!]

I have long been of the belief that LM is innocent. In my investigations I looked at the MO of the killer and tried to find an alternative to LM. My candidate is Danilo Restivo. He is now a convicted murderer. The warped nature of his crimes strongly suggests that he could have been 'Stocky man'. I have a lot of evidence to back this up but unfortunately do not have the time to get involved. Those who think LM innocent should investigate this guy as an alternate perpetrator.

As they say on University Challenge here is your starter for ten

IS IT WORTH A CHECK

Where EXACTLY was Danilo Restivo on the evening of 30/06/03?

Similarities between the Heather Barnett murder (12/11/2002) and that of Jodie Jones (30/06/2003).

1 Head wounds; both had blunt force injuries to the back of the head with no weapon found, though a hammer was attributed in HB’s case. However the pathologist in the Jones case said it could also have been made by forcing her head against something hard like a wall.

2 Neck wounds; both suffered massive mutilation injuries with a bladed weapon to the neck area almost severing the head.

3 Breast area; both had been mutilated in this area. Barnett’s were fully removed. Jones’s left breast had been attacked.

4 Both crime scenes had evidence of a struggle before death.

5 Clothes; both victims had their clothes cut off.

6 Elements of symmetry/quirkiness; it is said that HB’s incised breasts were placed either side of her head. Jodie’s brassiere cups were placed one inside the other.

7 Hair; HB had some of her hair placed by one hand with the hair of another woman next to the other. Jodie had some of her hair pulled out and some of her hair was around her fingers. The uncovered body overnight with rain may be a factor either as a cause or adjuster of volume or positioning. It seems to me from pictures that all three women had auburn hair.

Danilo Restivo tied up his first victim the Italian Alisa Claps and Jodie was tied up. He was also suspected of tying up two children and cutting one with a knife. Settled out of court in Italy when he was younger.

Alisa Claps only had her own hair by the body.

The attack on Jodie is more severe but with some deranged killers the violence escalates a bit each time.

Danilo Restivo and his actions

Any study I suggest would conclude that he was a stalker, he was cunning, he planned meticulously especially when constructing an alibi and he was extremely DNA savvy. The Bournemouth Echo has full trial coverage and gives a lot of details. He equipped himself with duplicate clothing. He had a balaclava gloves and scissors when stopped while under close surveillance. He was wearing a black hoodie and waterproof trousers. He has thick black hair and looks stocky to podgy in photos.

His initial alibi for the HB murder was well constructed and included falsifying workplace logs.
An Italian case observer said he was taunting police saying in effect catch me if you can.
Questions arising

What detail of the HB murder was in the public domain prior to Jodie’s murder that could have facilitated a copycat/similar MO?

When did the Dorset police last have contact with Restivo and was he under any kind of surveillance prior to the close surveillance which commenced March 2004? If so what form did it take and what if any records were kept?

What event triggered the close surveillance?

When he was questioned was he (a) under arrest (b) questioned under caution or (c) merely questioned as part of general enquiries? When exactly is mid 2003?

Did Dorset police at any time inform other police forces (in England, Wales and Scotland) of the nature of the HB murder and ask them to report any similar MO.

Did Dorset police again notify other forces at any time that Restivo was on their patch or that they had lost track of him and they should keep a lookout for this person of interest?

The biggest question is; do any of the four unattributed male partial DNA samples match Restivo’s dna?
Is it worth a check?

I have removed all my opinions and speculations since if the result is negative, whilst not removing him entirely as a potential suspect, other avenue would need to be explored such as a partner.

It is an area where most people think that the perp was a local but that may not be the case.

I see Restivo was being questioned in mid 2003 for the murder of Heather Barnett.
Jodi was killed on 30th of June of course,exactly half way through 2003.
Maybe he nipped up to Scotland just before he was detained by the police for one last crime fearing the net was closing in Bubo.As you say,his whereabouts for 30th June would have to be established,obviously if he was in police custody on this date then he has a cast iron alibi.

[nugnug]

there at least 2 witness 2 jodi walking down the path an or the stocky a simple google search wil confirm this

[Bubo bubo]

I see Restivo was being questioned in mid 2003 for the murder of Heather Barnett.
Jodi was killed on 30th of June of course,exactly half way through 2003.
Maybe he nipped up to Scotland just before he was detained by the police for one last crime fearing the net was closing in Bubo.As you say,his whereabouts for 30th June would have to be established,obviously if he was in police custody on this date then he has a cast iron alibi.

He could have gone to Italy. There was a murder in Italy 71 days before Jody which has been attributed to him. The police switched their attention from him to HB's ex. It is clear he was very good at creating an Alibi. Look at the crafty way he forged his work records for the HB case. I believe he said he was going to Italy and went. He then flew from Italy to Edinburgh for example and then planned and executed Jodie's murder before retuning to Italy and then returning home. In doing this he had created an Alibi for his whereabouts and executed a murder that only the true killer of HB would know of the MO. This if the similarities were discovered would further diminish the police interest in him for the HB murder.

There has not been another case anywhere in the UK since Jodie’s murder which has remotely the same MO. I have no doubt that there may well have been folk who might have wanted her dead for a variety of reasons who lived local but the nature and the scale screams deranged individual. Even if the killer was trying to make it look maniacal it was asking a lot to go that far especially for a one off. I do not need to tell you the local reactions and the police’s handling of the case.

Therefore the question becomes if not Luke then who?

I believe there is a possibility that Restivo was playing games and Jodie’s murder may have been a deliberate attempt to confuse police. He used an MO that only the HB killer would know. Unfortunately the connection, for whatever reason was not made maybe due to jurisdiction or the rain removing some of the unique identifiers associated with the HB case. It is likely that he had constructed an alibi that would almost conclusively rule him out and by using Scotland he was putting it out of his territory. Later if needed he could cite Jodie’s killing as evidence of a similar crime that could not be him and this suggested a lone deranged killer had killed her and HB. Further if he killed her elsewhere in the woods he could then have a second bite of the cherry later. Launching a second phony attack and staging her on a path where others had walked and had seen nothing. It would allow him to create a purely Scottish alibi and changes in clothing would further muddy the waters. Such a local alibi would be required if they ever had evidence he had visited Scotland.

The killer was likely to be wearing gloves and it is likely that they had through contact picked up male DNA partials from a variety of sources. This might have been accidental or deliberate on the killer’s part. They were then transferred to Jodie.

Advances in DNA profiling led in part to Restivo’s conviction and formed part of the evidence against him. New developments in testing allowed them to get a match chance of 1 in 57000. I cannot find the name of the new test (Senc5?) but it was conducted in 2008 on a green towel, which had long been an exhibit. He said he had used this towel to indicate the colour of the curtains HB was to make to explain his DNA. Surely it could be argued that fresh testing of key exhibits in Luke’s case might yield new DNA evidence and possibly identify the four partials more extensively. This argument could be used mentioning the Restivo case as an example/reason but without suggesting his involvement. Others might see the possible connection and spark debate.

Where was Restivo

Reports by police in newspapers suggest that he was under surveillance of some kind even before the close surveillance was instituted. Though a person of interest they moved the focus of investigation to concentrate on HB’s ex. “It meant at times we had to have him under surveillance 24 hours a day and we have to ensure we had him under control.” Former Detective Superintendent Phil James was head of the Major Crime Team from 2002-2007 before he retired. Clearly without access to the case file getting precise dates would be extremely difficult if not impossible and if they did cockup they would hardly be specific enough in memoirs or interviews as to the dates he was or was not under close watch. It is stated by police that he remained in the area but they do not say if he went away for any reason and for how long. I doubt he was being watched during the first half of 2003 because the focus shifted and the HB murder was in the run up to Christmas and New Year and time would be used creating teams, victim support, processing exhibits etc.

I think Dorset police might have cocked up in watching him. They are relatively small rural force and in summer resources are required for local events and the influx of tourists. Even they say the HB murder was their biggest crime ever. It could be that the penny finally dropped and they made the connection but said nothing. The most likely time for this might have been the beginning of March 2004 when they say 24/7 was in place. What was in the news about Luke at this time? When was he in court?

Indeed it is possible that Restivo ‘clocked them watching him at some point. He had been questioned extensively and may have felt the need to do something to ease his paranoia. He could have found a tracker which stimulated his game playing tendencies.’ Catch me if you can’. They may even have had to drop him for a while because he was showing very normal behavior. It is also possible that resources for such an operation in this area were scarce and 24/7/365 was not on. If he knew when they were watching him he could also know when they were not. It is also possible that they never made the connection because of the direction the case took in Scotland.

Newspaper report

Detectives knew they needed more and, in 2008, DNA samples were taken from a blood-stained green towel found in Mrs. Barnett's flat.
Police believed the killer used it to wipe blood off himself. Initially, only Mrs. Barnett's blood was found but another test found the DNA of another person and the match was linked to Restivo.
Crucially, when asked about the towel he said he had never seen it before and would not answer how his DNA was on it. Later he said the towel was his and that he had taken it to Mrs. Barnett's to use as a colour match for the curtains. He said he did not say this before because he had memory lapses.
 
My view

This you may say is ‘Unicorn’ or magical thinking even wild imaginings but any study of Restivo’s behaviour from his early days; during the disappearance of AC in Potenza to the HB murder show he is more than capable of conceiving and executing such a plan and covering his tracks. Even later (2006?) when dragged in for cutting women’s hair in public places he confessed to being a hair fetishist. They even had video of him stalking women in long grass.

[snow66!]

Anyway,I think we have established if Luke is guilty then he didn't arrive home till after Shane left at 6.20.
So just to recap,Luke kills Jodi at 5.15,calls her house at 5.32 which is aborted [a mere 15 minutes after the killing] phones again at 5.38,gets through to Ovens who tells him Jodi has left.Luke is then seen by the gate at the Newbattle end by Fleming and Walsh about 5.50 then at 6.00 sitting on a wall at the end of his street by the bycycle boys.This is probably the most reliable sighting when you think about it,due to the fact that the boys actually knew who Luke was,far more reliable than a fleeting glance from a motor car by strangers who didn't know Luke from Adam.Just think about that.
The descriptions of Lukes clothing was different by the witnesses too,at least that is what I have read.

Anyway,we are discussing a guilty scenario at the moment,so,Luke is then seen at 6.20 by one of the bike boys on his return.

So,when does Luke arrive home? Did he leave it till 9.00 o'clock? Surely not,besides the claim is that the parka was being burnt around 6.30 wasn't it? So we will have to conclude that Luke walked home soon after the bike boy saw him around 6.20.
Worth pausing for just a minute here to ask why Luke loitered for around 50 minutes between the end of the path and returning home.What was the purpose? We know what he claims,that he was waiting for Jodi.But from a guilty point of view,why??
It wasn't going to give him any kind of alibi was it,and Jodi's body could have been found at any time.
Was Luke really so confident that he was forensically clean if the police picked him up before he got home? Well not if he immediately burned his jacket in the log burner.

So why loiter and waste time on the way home? Very risky! VERY RISKY!.
Never mind,this is a guilty scenario.
So,Luke arrives home about 6.30 or is it nearer 6.40 after he has called David High?
Which is it? Does he go into the house first? I hope i've got the time of the call correct?

OK,well lets just say he goes into the house around 6.30,what was said between Luke and Corrine?
Remember Luke was about to restrict the time they had to discuss and plan things by phoning David High a few minutes later at 6.35'
Now again we will pause to consider what Lukes plan of action was.I mean the murder was pre-meditated wasn't it? I mean it wasn't an accident out of the blue.We know the amount of damage that was done to Jodi as well as being stripped and tied up.
So let us look at Lukes apparent plan.
Arrange to meet Jodi after school so as to kill and mutilate her,make sure that Jodi's family knows your going to meet her,which they do,a ban has just been lifted and texts made,meet Jodi and kill her,quick wash in a burn,then immediately phone her mothers house to say she hasn't arrived,even though she's not allowed on the path herself,loiter on the streets for a further 50 minutes so that witnesses will see him for some reason???,go home and EVENTUALLY burn evidence before Jodi is found,explain to his mum where he has been and what he has done,ask her for an alibi,call David High and friends,meet them at the Abbey and muck about till 9.00 o'clock then go home,if Jodi hasn't been found then he will volunteer to go look for her if the family contacts him,he will take Mia the dog with him and pretend she finds Jodi.
Job done,Jodi killed and alibi in place.Didn't the police say that Luke was very clever??

Was that his plan? Must have been! How did he know that his mum would immediately give him an alibi and help destroy evidence when he returned home at 6.30?
How did he know that the police wouldn't be waiting for him there at 6.30 after wasting so much time on the way back?
Why did he waste so much time on the way back? What did he hope to gain?
If the police got to his house first his mother couldn't give him an alibi,she couldn't have known what Luke had done till he got home,could she? She couldn't have destroyed any evidence either.

Oh well,i've gone off track again.So,where were we? Yes,still around 6.30 when Luke has just arrived home and broken the news to Corrine who immediately agrees to cover for him and burn his parka in the log burner.Something he COULDN'T have planned,Corrine might just have easily said,'you monster,I wont help you,it's off to the slammer with you my lad!'
But,if guilty,Corrine did indeed help Luke and give him an alibi,then he left minutes later to play with his friends.Why Luke and Corrine thought this necessary I dont know,but they did.After all Luke was the one who got in touch with High and asked to meet him at the Abbey.
Dont know how meeting up with his friends helped Luke,if it was me I would have stayed at home and helped destroy evidence,wash and get my alibi straight.
But there you are,Luke's pre medditated plan included meeting his friends at 7.00 o'clock after spending a few minutes telling his mum that she had just become the mother of an evil twisted killer.
BUT,there you are,everyone plans murders differently I suppose.Who am I to judge?
 
Well,I suppose thats about all there is to say regarding a guilty Luke scenario.
Most of what I have said must be true if Luke is guilty.Right???
Just add in Shane being taken into the mashing tatties scenario and thats about it!
The crown rests its case.

[snow66!]

How could Luke make any kind of plan of action including Shane and Corrine when he hadn't told them what he intended to do?
His plan counted on them  giving him an alibi right away out of the blue for a gruesome murder.
However,the way Luke planned things loitering for more than an hour after the murder before going home put this in extreme jeopardy.
If Jodi's body was found right away and the police went to Lukes house before he got home then the game was up right away.Didn't Luke realize this?
Surely it was imperitive for Luke to get home ASAP after killing Jodi to arrange an alibi? Or should I say,PRAY that his family would give him an alibi!
And we know that Shane didn't get home again till 9.55 that evening,what if Jodi's body had been found by then and the police was sitting in the house when he got home,how could an alibi be arranged then?
No,Lukes plan was full of holes the way he executed it,especially relying on his family for an alibi on the spot.
And no doubt Shane went out most/some evenings,so Luke must have been aware that he may not be in the house when he returned at 6.30 to arrange an alibi anyway.

What was the official Crown scenario anyway? Do we know?

[snow66!]

Just noticed,this thread was started on the 20th anniversary of the murder.

[snow66!]

He could have gone to Italy. There was a murder in Italy 71 days before Jody which has been attributed to him. The police switched their attention from him to HB's ex. It is clear he was very good at creating an Alibi. Look at the crafty way he forged his work records for the HB case. I believe he said he was going to Italy and went. He then flew from Italy to Edinburgh for example and then planned and executed Jodie's murder before retuning to Italy and then returning home. In doing this he had created an Alibi for his whereabouts and executed a murder that only the true killer of HB would know of the MO. This if the similarities were discovered would further diminish the police interest in him for the HB murder.

There has not been another case anywhere in the UK since Jodie’s murder which has remotely the same MO. I have no doubt that there may well have been folk who might have wanted her dead for a variety of reasons who lived local but the nature and the scale screams deranged individual. Even if the killer was trying to make it look maniacal it was asking a lot to go that far especially for a one off. I do not need to tell you the local reactions and the police’s handling of the case.

Therefore the question becomes if not Luke then who?

I believe there is a possibility that Restivo was playing games and Jodie’s murder may have been a deliberate attempt to confuse police. He used an MO that only the HB killer would know. Unfortunately the connection, for whatever reason was not made maybe due to jurisdiction or the rain removing some of the unique identifiers associated with the HB case. It is likely that he had constructed an alibi that would almost conclusively rule him out and by using Scotland he was putting it out of his territory. Later if needed he could cite Jodie’s killing as evidence of a similar crime that could not be him and this suggested a lone deranged killer had killed her and HB. Further if he killed her elsewhere in the woods he could then have a second bite of the cherry later. Launching a second phony attack and staging her on a path where others had walked and had seen nothing. It would allow him to create a purely Scottish alibi and changes in clothing would further muddy the waters. Such a local alibi would be required if they ever had evidence he had visited Scotland.

The killer was likely to be wearing gloves and it is likely that they had through contact picked up male DNA partials from a variety of sources. This might have been accidental or deliberate on the killer’s part. They were then transferred to Jodie.

Advances in DNA profiling led in part to Restivo’s conviction and formed part of the evidence against him. New developments in testing allowed them to get a match chance of 1 in 57000. I cannot find the name of the new test (Senc5?) but it was conducted in 2008 on a green towel, which had long been an exhibit. He said he had used this towel to indicate the colour of the curtains HB was to make to explain his DNA. Surely it could be argued that fresh testing of key exhibits in Luke’s case might yield new DNA evidence and possibly identify the four partials more extensively. This argument could be used mentioning the Restivo case as an example/reason but without suggesting his involvement. Others might see the possible connection and spark debate.

Where was Restivo

Reports by police in newspapers suggest that he was under surveillance of some kind even before the close surveillance was instituted. Though a person of interest they moved the focus of investigation to concentrate on HB’s ex. “It meant at times we had to have him under surveillance 24 hours a day and we have to ensure we had him under control.” Former Detective Superintendent Phil James was head of the Major Crime Team from 2002-2007 before he retired. Clearly without access to the case file getting precise dates would be extremely difficult if not impossible and if they did cockup they would hardly be specific enough in memoirs or interviews as to the dates he was or was not under close watch. It is stated by police that he remained in the area but they do not say if he went away for any reason and for how long. I doubt he was being watched during the first half of 2003 because the focus shifted and the HB murder was in the run up to Christmas and New Year and time would be used creating teams, victim support, processing exhibits etc.

I think Dorset police might have cocked up in watching him. They are relatively small rural force and in summer resources are required for local events and the influx of tourists. Even they say the HB murder was their biggest crime ever. It could be that the penny finally dropped and they made the connection but said nothing. The most likely time for this might have been the beginning of March 2004 when they say 24/7 was in place. What was in the news about Luke at this time? When was he in court?

Indeed it is possible that Restivo ‘clocked them watching him at some point. He had been questioned extensively and may have felt the need to do something to ease his paranoia. He could have found a tracker which stimulated his game playing tendencies.’ Catch me if you can’. They may even have had to drop him for a while because he was showing very normal behavior. It is also possible that resources for such an operation in this area were scarce and 24/7/365 was not on. If he knew when they were watching him he could also know when they were not. It is also possible that they never made the connection because of the direction the case took in Scotland.

Newspaper report

Detectives knew they needed more and, in 2008, DNA samples were taken from a blood-stained green towel found in Mrs. Barnett's flat.
Police believed the killer used it to wipe blood off himself. Initially, only Mrs. Barnett's blood was found but another test found the DNA of another person and the match was linked to Restivo.
Crucially, when asked about the towel he said he had never seen it before and would not answer how his DNA was on it. Later he said the towel was his and that he had taken it to Mrs. Barnett's to use as a colour match for the curtains. He said he did not say this before because he had memory lapses.
 
My view

This you may say is ‘Unicorn’ or magical thinking even wild imaginings but any study of Restivo’s behaviour from his early days; during the disappearance of AC in Potenza to the HB murder show he is more than capable of conceiving and executing such a plan and covering his tracks. Even later (2006?) when dragged in for cutting women’s hair in public places he confessed to being a hair fetishist. They even had video of him stalking women in long grass.

Wasn't there about ten male samples of unidentified bodily fluids found on/near Jodi?
Have you told Dr Lean about your theory Bubo? She may still read the forum anyway.

[Parky41]

How could Luke make any kind of plan of action including Shane and Corrine when he hadn't told them what he intended to do?
His plan counted on them  giving him an alibi right away out of the blue for a gruesome murder.
However,the way Luke planned things loitering for more than an hour after the murder before going home put this in extreme jeopardy.
If Jodi's body was found right away and the police went to Lukes house before he got home then the game was up right away.Didn't Luke realize this?
Surely it was imperitive for Luke to get home ASAP after killing Jodi to arrange an alibi? Or should I say,PRAY that his family would give him an alibi!
And we know that Shane didn't get home again till 9.55 that evening,what if Jodi's body had been found by then and the police was sitting in the house when he got home,how could an alibi be arranged then?
No,Lukes plan was full of holes the way he executed it,especially relying on his family for an alibi on the spot.
And no doubt Shane went out most/some evenings,so Luke must have been aware that he may not be in the house when he returned at 6.30 to arrange an alibi anyway.

What was the official Crown scenario anyway? Do we know?

Flip it over. He had no alibi, his mother would know he was off to spend the evening with his girlfriend. Look at what is more plausible over that which sounds unbelievable. Finding her dead, what to do? He was going to be the first person the police looked at, he knew that as would his mother. 'I found her dead, I need help' over 'I've just killed her, give me an alibi and get rid of ----'

Idling time is what we are asked to believe, loitering time, which it most certainly would not have been. Those were the gaps in the Crowns case that gave rise to opportunity, to be changed, rid of anything incriminating and so forth. With no alibi, there is nothing places LM home from just after 4pm.

Personally himself - He is for the off just before 7pm, there has been around 40mins in the immediate time frame beforehand. You mention police arriving at HIS door any minute, the risk of that taking place. Not really? 5:40pm - 7pm. The body is discovered, it is reported to the police, what is there not? Any means of identification, no phone. Would her killer know there was none? Or, the parents reach out to make contact with the girl, try his house, not there, try him, where is he? Away from home. Point, up until a certain point, a safety net, there was no risk of anything pointing towards LM at all, of police barging into the home.

We can apply, it is unbelievable to think the killer would take himself off anywhere else with other people, or we can apply this is exactly what he needed to do, further alibi and keep himself away from the house, keep anyone away from the house. Such as those pals he was with, they themselves could have arrived at his home for him without phoning first?

Therefore, his plan? - What to do, I have met and killed my girlfriend, her parents know she is off to meet with me, my mother knows I am with her.  I need an alibi, how am I going to get that, who can I ask to help me, what will I tell them? What else do I need to do, I need to be seen waiting on her, this happens between 6 and 6:20pm. The fires that were and weren't? Anything happening at home here? Therefore I need to keep myself away from home, to lesson risk of anyone arriving there?

[Parky41]

What was the official Crown scenario anyway? Do we know?

That he had no alibi. Means and opportunity for disposal. Witnesses who saw him in places he claimed not to have been. Missing clothing and knife. That any forensics could be innocently explained away, as most know, this was a circumstantial case. Whilst there was nothing found directly linking him to the murder, neither was there anything found pointing it to that of a stranger, a another. That he had special knowledge of the location/injuries/clothing, of the victim.