LM V HMA Trial transcripts.

[David1819]

Ok, so this is what I meant about a false narrative in place, the exposure of many lies, which leaves the question, 'If this is what we are discovering here then what else has been manipulated and lied about?' It would seem that both SL and SF's were under the impression, safeguard even, of believing transcripts would never be made public, still under the safeguard of this being the case with statements in full? Attempting repeatedly to try and stop people from obtaining them? 

I first started commenting on this case because of lies I knew were in place. I took to studying what had been put out, intricately. Which was never around guilt/innocence. The ludicrous application of some giant conspiracy just to fit LM up. Therefore I set myself a question, an area to study around. Why did suspicion fall upon LM, why could he not be eliminated as suspect in the young girls murder? Realism and not fallacy.

The alibi - If SM, genuinely, within such a short period of time, had complete amnesia from the moment he finished work, then that is what he clearly should have stuck with? Is it really believable however, that someones memory was selective in what was lost? Which was around that crucial time of day. What of his alibi? Was it, that after playing the 'I cannot remember,' did he realise, wait a minute, I am going to need an alibi here also? There we have the birth of the story of them all being together, interacting with each other? Whilst perhaps trying to evade what he had been doing, thinking at first perhaps, my watching porn and masturbating has nothing to do with the young girls murder, but it did, even in its simplest form, he also required an alibi? Strength in numbers?

Compare - If he had no amnesia, why would he have initially played the cannot remember card? Did this show that SM was not wanting directly involved in that alibi for his brother? Wanting to be part of becoming entangled in lying for him, therefore lying by omission instead? He may very well have been aware of far more and wanting nothing to do with it. It doesn't necessarily point towards believing his younger brother had murdered someone, but certainly that he was not home.

All in all, it really is a tangled mess of lies, it doesn't matter which way you swing it - LM was clearly not home at that point. The original alibi ran from 5:05pm until 5:40pm, it was CCTV and phone logs that showed those times to be completely wrong. We have CM arriving home just after 5:15pm, SM's internet session ending at 5:16pm, we have LM saying he had made the call from the wall at the entrance of the estate, first call at 5:32pm. The original alibi around 35mins, evaporated to around 13mins, which did not fit around that evenly spaced out, very relaxed dinner tale.

Porn and masturbating - Does not just take place in an empty house. It does however bring with it awareness. We are conscious to the presence of others, alert to any noise/movement, alert to any risk of being caught/interrupted. What the AD was demonstrating, was that it was never simply that he may not have seen his brother, he had not seen him, nor heard him. Clearly hearing his mother arriving home and ending his internet session. LM claimed to have been listening to music whilst making dinner.

Did Lean have access to and read the transcripts prior to writing the books?

[nugnug]

whos blog is that why are they only listed as bm

do they hae any more transcripts

[nugnug]

It has been in place for such a long time that SM left home just after dinner, the time applied, inferred, was just after 5:30pm. We see that this was in fact not before 6:20pm. Which points towards any dinner being made after his mother arrived home and not for her arrival home. CM stated that her elder son was in and out all evening, catching her having a fly fag? Yet we see here SM saying he was not home until much later. LM is supposed to have borrowed a torch from his elder brother, we see here that he claimed to be unaware that anything was amiss until the early hours of July 1st.

Ok, so that first call at 5:32pm placing LM by his claims on Newbattle Road just before this. He called his mother at 7pm, again from Newbattle Road (claimed). Claiming the call was to see if Jodi had been to the house. He had called the boys just before 7pm and after 7pm? To arrange the meeting in the Abbey. Approx 80mins is what we are asked to believe, that LM was idling around in one spot waiting on a girl, giving up after such an extraordinary length of time, shrugging his shoulders and arranging to meet with friends instead? A girl who had no phone, no security, walking an isolated path alone, she does not appear? - Again, I am highlighting why valid reason for suspicion fell upon LM. Called the boys back but not his girlfriends house to check where she was?

In that time frame, he was seen by F&W at the wooden gate, several hundred yards from his estate entrance. At approx 5:40pm, his original time he said he had left home. Seen again between here and the estate entrance coming on 6pm. He denies these sightings were him. He is without doubt at the estate entrance, slightly up from it at a point, from 6pm to 6:20pm approx. Seen by people who knew him there. So no sightings of him at the entrance from 5:30pm until touching 6pm, nothing from approx 6:20pm until with the boys in the Abbey well after 7pm. 6:20 - 25pm, SM leaves the estate, he did not see his brother around the entrance of it.

That whilst 5 others saw LM in places he claimed not to have been, no one saw him where he claimed to have been at those times.

and we are supposed to belive these documents are real even though there posted by a complety anon person

[Steve_uk]

and we are supposed to belive these documents are real even though there posted by a complety anon person

We may as well nugnug. Best not to be too cynical amongst the flotsam and jetsam of this site.

[nugnug]

We may as well nugnug. Best not to be too cynical amongst the flotsam and jetsam of this site.

well i in slightly strange that they have only  posted transcripts from one witness considreing how many witneses were called.

[Parky41]

We may as well nugnug. Best not to be too cynical amongst the flotsam and jetsam of this site.

If one goes to the left under the BM, they will see Nov 23, you will find more in there.

They are genuine.

There have so far been, full transcripts from AW, SK and SM. Partial transcripts from JaJ's, CM and AH, F&W. The blogger is one of LM's main campaigners whom I believe started to question originally the claim that the general public could not obtain these. Nor that they could be made public.

[David1819]

If one goes to the left under the BM, they will see Nov 23, you will find more in there.

They are genuine.

There have so far been, full transcripts from AW, SK and SM. Partial transcripts from JaJ's, CM and AH, F&W. The blogger is one of LM's main campaigners whom I believe started to question originally the claim that the general public could not obtain these. Nor that they could be made public.
[/glow]

Is that what SL and CM told them?

[nugnug]

If one goes to the left under the BM, they will see Nov 23, you will find more in there.

They are genuine.

There have so far been, full transcripts from AW, SK and SM. Partial transcripts from JaJ's, CM and AH, F&W. The blogger is one of LM's main campaigners whom I believe started to question originally the claim that the general public could not obtain these. Nor that they could be made public.

i just hae and found abslutly nothing  theres nothing  another than the letters bm

[Parky41]

Is that what SL and CM told them?

Yes. Also that there was no requirement to have them, waste of funding when they could do nothing to take the case forward. That one had around 80% thus no need for anyone else to obtain, this then changed to claiming to have 100%, yet they have not all been transcribed. Which then begged the question from some top campaigners of why had these had not been made available for campaigners to see. Bit of a hullabaloo going on there.

Nugnug - Under BM it says archive, press on this it will show Nov 23. Hope that helps. 

[David1819]

Yes. Also that there was no requirement to have them, waste of funding when they could do nothing to take the case forward. That one had around 80% thus no need for anyone else to obtain, this then changed to claiming to have 100%, yet they have not all been transcribed. Which then begged the question from some top campaigners of why had these had not been made available for campaigners to see. Bit of a hullabaloo going on there.

Nugnug - Under BM it says archive, press on this it will show Nov 23. Hope that helps.

Doesn't surprise me. The whole thing reeked of disinformation to begin with.

[nugnug]

Doesn't surprise me. The whole thing reeked of disinformation to begin with.

s msn who made up shite about a forensic breakthrough is talking about disinformation

[nugnug]

Yes. Also that there was no requirement to have them, waste of funding when they could do nothing to take the case forward. That one had around 80% thus no need for anyone else to obtain, this then changed to claiming to have 100%, yet they have not all been transcribed. Which then begged the question from some top campaigners of why had these had not been made available for campaigners to see. Bit of a hullabaloo going on there.

Nugnug - Under BM it says archive, press on this it will show Nov 23. Hope that helps.

no it doesntarchive it says abslutly nothing other than bm

[David1819]

Alice Walker full transcript 13/12/04

https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/alice-walker-full-transcript-131204.html


Steven Kelly Full transcript (10th and 13th Dec 04)

https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/steven-kelly-full-transcripts.html


The search trio evidence - some testimony from the search trio

https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/the-search-trio-evidence-some-testimony.html


When did Luke's mum hand in the missing knife?

https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/when-was-knife-from-pouch-handed-in-to.html


The Parka Jacket and 8 Witnesses

https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/the-parka-jacket-and-witnesses.html

[nugnug]

posted totaly anomously by sombody calling themselves bm

a bit strange that isnt it

[Parky41]

More transcripts are to be put up shortly:

The problem with blogs such as the alias that is John Smythe, is much of that false narrative that has been in place and spread, is being exposed for being made up of misinformation, clear disinformation/blatant lies where the Mitchell case is concerned.

They have of course been getting exposed along the way, sadly it has taken the release of transcripts to have main supporters of innocence see they have been lied to. Naturally for now, they are still in support of innocence - But they are rightfully questioning these liars. Re-working their own take on things from other source, rather than where their main reliance has been, that blind faith they placed?

If one has been caught blatantly lying from those, the trial, then it is foolish to apply honesty has been met elsewhere, such as statements, forensics, reports, just about anything that has been spun.

Most get it, the tactic to gain public support, placing focus elsewhere, attempting to show self interest in others? - By way of lying, so we remove this focus, we remove that self interest, where we are seeing clearly this has never been the case. What are you left with, where is the strength now around showing LM to be innocent by those means?  These others from the police up had not lied, there is no proof that they did. There is however the opposite, the proof that those stating they did, have in fact been the ones who are/have been lying?