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

[guest154]

Is it possible to enlighten me to the particular comments your mean and your reason for feeling that these should or should not be relevent to the main site as oppessed to other aspects of the case you feel are more important.

When I think of it the Sky news issue you seem to consider trivial turned out to be anything but, however you seem to feel it shouldn't be on there?

It's not that I don't think that they shouldn't be on there - just that I was suprised the Sky News comments were on the website. When something like the inscription wasn't because from an outsider looking in the inscription looks like an alarm bell - so I thought the website would at least try and explain...rather than not mention it.

were did you get that from could you post the link please.

Mrs Walsh and Mrs Fleming were most insistent that the youth they had seen that day was indeed Mitchell.

They identified Mitchell in court as being this person.

^ You've read the trial documents, or least you said you have nugnug, so you should know whether above statement is true or not without a link? 

[nugnug]

i dont need i can find the news artical somwhere if you will be with me.

so i take it you made that up then mat.

its really very simple to post a link from a newspaer atical witch is where i assume you are cliaming to have got it.

[gordo30]

There you go again mat including things that become contentious as in "the gate" what gate do you mean? what gate did F&W mean? why didn't the jogger they reported to have seen also not see Luke  at "this gate".

What time did all this occur? was it after 6pm when the husband who was working in Ireland usually came home and as F&W stated they left after maybe giving him his dinner, or was it at 5:40 pm before the sed occurance's normally took place? wow im getting confused just writting this and let me tell you there are more inaccuracies that could be added but they would simply just create a stramash(good scottish word with no real meaning). This of course is the testimony you seem to be hedging you belief that Luke is guilty on, so I must say I pity you because of you can get clarity from even half of F&W testimony then im sure there is a case for commital right there.

[guest154]

i dont need i can find the news artical somwhere if you will be with me.

so i take it you made that up then mat.

 

No. Not at all.

There you go again mat including things that become contentious as in "the gate" what gate do you mean? what gate did F&W mean? why didn't the jogger they reported to have seen also not see Luke  at "this gate".

What time did all this occur? was it after 6pm when the husband who was working in Ireland usually came home and as F&W stated they left after maybe giving him his dinner, or was it at 5:40 pm before the sed occurance's normally took place? wow im getting confused just writting this and let me tell you there are more inaccuracies that could be added but they would simply just create a stramash(good scottish word with no real meaning). This of course is the testimony you seem to be hedging you belief that Luke is guilty on, so I must say I pity you because of you can get clarity from even half of F&W testimony then im sure there is a case for commital right there.

I didn't say 'gate' - the word 'gate' was in a quote. I'm pretty sure you said no formal I.D was ever though - yet...the quote says they identified Luke in court.

I don't mean to be rude, Gordo - but you must be family (or close to it) as the lies and deception you try to impound on the case seems strikingly familiar. 

[gordo30]

If thats the case then I would be willing to address all these lies and deceptions with you, If of course you can put forward and arguement worthy of my time.

I am of course nothing to do with the Mitchells and although I have spent many an evening in the good graces of certain people in the town of Newtongrange(nitton they call it) I have never been to Lukes house or personally met Luke,Corrine,Sandra or Billy or any of Mrs Mitchells family. I do however believe completely in Luke mitchell innocence and will defend that stance with ever ability and resourse open to me.

[nugnug]

well im going to find all the newspaper articals about flemming and walsh in a little while and that will clearly prove who is lying.

[guest154]

If thats the case then I would be willing to address all these lies and deceptions with you, If of course you can put forward and arguement worthy of my time.

I don't see the point though. To be blunt, anything that doesn't twist the way you want it - is turned around into witnesses making things up, saying they saw him when they didn't and the police went after him even if the evidence didn't fit. 

Seems you play the blame game. So I don't see room for debate. 

[nugnug]

http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2008HCJAC28.html

[guest154]

"This summary is provided to assist in understanding the Court's decision. It does not form part of the reasons for that decision. The full opinion of the Court is the only authoritative document."


 

[gordo30]

Have you ever directed that assessment on yourself mat? the way I twist things!! doesn't that start to become surreal when all I have is the same information as yourself to base my opinion on. Is it that you want to take away my right to develope my opinion? is it wrong to have an opposite opinion to anyone? If I do am I beset with the same credentials as someone who would commit such a crime as this is this what your trying to say?

I am here to debate with you, to put forward my perspective if its not too much of a shock for you!! could it be that someone who was jailed for the most terrible of crimes could well be innocent, is that too much to take for some?

I am away for dinner but I am always here to debate and I always consider myself to be able to be swayed by proof

[guest154]

is it wrong to have an opposite opinion to anyone? If I do am I beset with the same credentials as someone who would commit such a crime as this is this what your trying to say?

Yeah.....of course I am................absolutely............. 

[nugnug]

so what do you think of all the dna evedence then mat.

[Buddy]

Are you saing that both Luke Mitchell and his mother wanting to take a polygraph, actually doing it and both passing with different questions was down to being lucky?  Since 30th June 2003 this family was struck a major blow and it has been 9 years of bad luck ever since, but it seems out of all this devastation you are suggesting that luck was on their side the day they sat the individual polygraph tests.  Did you actually think things through before you left that comment?

It was a joke. Sorry.

[nugnug]

i dont think that was directed at you buddy.

[nugnug]

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