The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003

[nugnug]

the investigating stated very clearly that there was no postive id.

the website does not say that anyone who bothers to read it will no that.

[guest154]

No, I wasn't saying that the website says that. I said that the two witnesses I mentioned are spoken of on the website. 

[nugnug]

http://caseblog.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk/luke-mitchell-is-innocent/the-finding-of-the-body/

[guest154]

Still not what I was looking. I've come to the conclusion that the website doesn't mention it. 

[gordo30]

The two witnesses I talked about are mentioned on Luke's official website.  The website complains that it took them a while to come forward.

The two witnesses you talk of didn't see him at the exact area of the murder(your words) and didn't come forward of their own accord ever!! That had to be facilitated by a collegue of theirs. These are the same two who lied and I can say that  without fear of incrimination about the time and method of their 1st sightings of Luke. They stated that It was the husband who brought home a paper which had Lukes picture init even although at the time in question the husband was working in Ireland and no picture had been published in the national press.

[nugnug]

http://caseblog.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk/luke-mitchell-is-innocent/media-and-other-considerations/

[nugnug]

http://caseblog.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk/luke-mitchell-is-innocent/documentaries/

[guest154]

The two witnesses you talk of didn't see him at the exact area of the murder(your words) and didn't come forward of their own accord ever!! That had to be facilitated by a collegue of theirs. These are the same two who lied and I can say that  without fear of incrimination about the time and method of their 1st sightings of Luke. They stated that It was the husband who brought home a paper which had Lukes picture init even although at the time in question the husband was working in Ireland and no picture had been published in the national press.

So two people lie that they saw Luke in the area?

[gordo30]

I think your starting to get it , but what concerns me more is your continuous attempts to state that Luke was in "the Area" of course he was he happened to live a matter of yards away.

[nugnug]

the discription the gave looked nothing like luke.

they described a man in his early twenty or late teens with shoulder length hair that's certainly not luke.

[guest154]

It looked enough like Luke to convince a jury. It also looked enough like Luke for Sandra Lean to put forward a suspect because he looks just like Luke so this could have been who the two saw in the area and believed that it was Luke. 

[gordo30]

Oh but the eyes nugnug how they were decribed as the Devils Eyes and then later they couldn't say what hieght he was as he was leaning against a fence looking at the ground!!

[nugnug]

yes hardly a reliable sighting.

[guest154]

Howcome the website doesn't mention the inscription, gorgo30? 

[nugnug]

I think your starting to get it , but what concerns me more is your continuous attempts to state that Luke was in "the Area" of course he was he happened to live a matter of yards away.

yes so if you live in the area you are going to be in the area arnt you.