Sorry for the lengthy reply, but hopefully you will see where I'm coming from, as to why I said that your posts were inaccurate/misleading. You are actually addressing nugnug with your questions, but I thought I would share with you what I know of the case, and also my opinion.
you say his mums his alibi, but on the frontline documentary when asked "have you ever asked luke
if he killed jodi" she didnt once say "no because he was with me at the time" she answered "I
didnt have to because a mother can just tell", it wouldn't be a case of motherly instinct helping
you decide your son was innocent if you were with him at the time and knew for a fact it couldnt
have been him, it wouldnt be left to motherly instinct to base ur opinion on. corinne messed up there. that was her chance to tell every one it couldnt have been him, luke was with her, nope she didnt mention it once. I see where you're coming from here, but how do we know she never mentioned in the interview at one point, that Luke was with her?. The documentary was edited and I don't think we have any way of knowing what ended up not being aired. Luke wasn't with her all of the evening. I think it was stated that he left home at 5.30pm. There was no confirmed time of death. I don't think that "corinne messed up" I think when she answered this question, "have you ever asked luke if he killed jodi" she answered honestly, covering times, even when she could not give him an alibi.
why should anyone else have to take one? they obviously all had an alibi. the police wanted to
clear luke at the time but just couldnt. No one should have to take a lie detector test. Two people who were witnesses against Luke were asked on the stand if they killed Jodi. They were each others alibi. The police did not make contact with another potential suspect till 3 years after the murder, so it is not known if he had an alibi or not, another potential suspect was also not traced until 3 years after the murder, so it is also not known if he had an alibi either. It is not obvious they all had an alibi, as it wasnt known at the time. Can you elaborate on the police wanting to clear Luke, but couldnt?
like i said, do you know how polygraphs work, what kind of reactions detect dishonesty? one
wouldnt experience these reactions if they were simply re-stating the same position they have for all these years. Do you know what questions Luke Mitchell and his mother were asked during the polygraph? The questions they were asked went far beyond asking if a pie was burnt and did they see each other at tea time and did she burn clothes in a log burner.
luke was a suspect from day 1? why did they interview 3000 people if they already had their man? I am not aware of any other police suspect being interviewed. Even after interviewing thousands of people there was still not one person who could place Luke Mitchell at or near the crime scene. No witnesses and no evidence whatsoever. Circumstantial claptrap was all they could come up with after all their months of investigating this murder. All the manpower used and thousand upon thousands of pounds at their disposal, and not one piece of concrete evidence.
theres no doubt in my mind luke mitchell could beat a lie detector, he's proven to be a cold person, someone who shows no emotion finding a body, shows no emotion in hours of police interrogation, and doesnt even respond emotionally to being found guilty and sent down... why would he feel anything when lying to a machine? You've got my interest. Can you tell me how and where it was proven that he is a cold person, who didnt show emotion when coming across the body, etc. If what you say is true then the witness statements from people who were there, and the police statement given must contain lies as they say different from what you state as fact.
it doesnt, but not having your girlfriends dna on you after spending the day together at school is
suspicious, almost like it was all washed off. Washed off by Luke or the rain? How could Luke or the rain possibly wash off his own dna from the clothes and naked body of Jodi, but leave the DNA of known and unknown persons on the clothes
and also on the naked body? There was blood, semen, spermheads, hairs, saliva, found on the
clothes and body, none of which belonged to Luke Mitchell.
so more than one person murdered jodi? they both ejaculated yet no signs of rape or sexual attack?
still waiting on proof of the blood, never heard that before I think that the fact there was semen/spermheads on the clothes, found on and in the body,
suggests that there could have been a sexual element to the murder. I found the following link
very interesting when I was trying to make some sense of it all, due to the presence of
semen/sperm but no sign of recent sexual abuse
http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/165/5/624.full.pdf so who was it then? why didnt they ever come forward? he was identified by a witness and she was a witness at the trial. ofcourse not he looked totally different, between 14 and 16 is some of the biggest changes a boy will go through in life. she couldnt point him because she was being honest in court, he did not look the same, why would she originally lie about seeing him only to change her mind when she got to court? No one positively identified Luke Mitchell, other than the boys on the bike who passed him, and knew him. You are referring to Andrina Bryson who was a witness at the trial. She did not identify Luke in her statement or when he was in the dock. She identified someone who may have been Jodi, although the description of the clothes worn were different to what Jodi was wearing when she was killed. She only saw, a side view, or back view of the girl, she changed the story so I am not sure what view she did see, but her evidence was used as a sighting of Jodi, and if it were Jodi, then the male she was with must have been Luke, according to the crown. The person she described in her statement was nothing like what Luke Mitchell looked like when he was 14, 15 or 16.
so 10 different people killed Jodi? No. But I believe that the DNA has to be revisited to find out who killed Jodi Jones, as the sperm must belong to someone, and as we already know it was not matched to the guy who is serving a lifer for the murder.
the mitchells have blamed everyone under the sun including every male member of jodi's immediate family and more.I have never, not once, seen or heard of any member of the Mitchell family blame anyone, nevermind any of Jodi's family. Donald Finday asked Jodi's two cousins in the dock if they killed her, that was because they were near the crime scene when it was claimed she was murdered, disposed of the bike they were on, one of them cut their hair which changed his appearance, and they did not go forward to the police till nearly a week later, when an appeal on television was aired for them to come forward.
