Author Topic: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003  (Read 1055427 times)

0 Members and 22 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
I think we should take a leaf out of Dr. Lean's book and keep the thread case related.  So I'll say no more regarding Lithium.
Then if that is the case maybe you should have send lithium a pm insted?

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830

Yes.
I think I understand teenagers better that you do son. ;)

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
show me the post where I said Luke should stay in jail?
Show me a post that you are not trying to prove someone's innocence by making up the wildest theories possible in order to explain away why their dna was at the scene.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
unlikely? it's the most obvious and probable explanation. Unless you think Kelly masturbating over a dead body but some how only left small traces of sperm.

He couldnt have been doing that anyway considering no one seen him in the area at all and Jodi's own sister said she was with him. You're barking up the wrong tree in my opinion.
I rather think that you should be looking towards Kelly rather than Luke as the murderer simply on the dna evidence alone.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Grahame has the most idiotic posts in this thread so far, first he claims a freshly washed shirt would smell like sweat, then he claimed by washing your hands more often you will prevent other people spreading germs to door handles. Now he doesn't realise a thread about Luke Mitchell would appear on google when searching Luke Mitchell and other relevant names. Off to bed mate youve had one too many.
see my signature it applies to you.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
Grahame has the most idiotic posts in this thread so far, first he claims a freshly washed shirt would smell like sweat, then he claimed by washing your hands more often you will prevent other people spreading germs to door handles. Now he doesn't realise a thread about Luke Mitchell would appear on google when searching Luke Mitchell and other relevant names. Off to bed mate youve had one too many.
Oh we have a bit of a cheeky insolent bastard here on the forum AGAIN have we?  ::)

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830

 :o :o :o

I do find this rather disturbing, how could he even fantasize about doing that to anybody after what he'd seen, unless he was completely unphased by it.  "i will stab with a big **** stick. watch your blood spill on the soil, i will watch as you wither and die."

I wonder what he put a black square over and changed to "stick"
So you DO think that Luke is guilty then?

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
DNA transfer from hand to clothing = a crazy wild theory? lol jog on mate youre all over the place.
So you don't reckon that dna evidence warrents more investigation then? Lets get this straight. You are basing Lukes guilt on lack of dna evidence. Yet you base the presence of Kelly's dna to prove him innocent? hmm I see.

guest154

  • Guest
Perhaps a little understanding of the female thought processes would help you keep your girlfriends a little longer? ::)

You really are a nasty old man that shouldn't be on the forum never mind the internet. Your hidden barbs expose you as nothing more than the tyro, trol and backseat moderator that you yourself aim to expose.

Outside your small group of friends, you're pittied, Grahame.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
I do find this rather disturbing, how could he even fantasize about doing that to anybody after what he'd seen, unless he was completely unphased by it.  "i will stab with a big **** stick. watch your blood spill on the soil, i will watch as you wither and die."

I wonder what he put a black square over and changed to "stick"
Yes it is. But then I am not trying to prove him guilty or innocent. All I have done was to question why go to such elaborate lengths in order to try and prove that dna evidence is no evidence at all and in doing so may be letting a murderer off the hook? I've just never seen that before and to my mind is approaching the case arse upwards.

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
You just replied to the same post twice grahame pal, get to bed.
I know you. Your speech berayeth you. ;)

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
You really are a nasty old man that shouldn't be on the forum never mind the internet. Your hidden barbs expose you as nothing more than the tyro, trol and backseat moderator that you yourself aim to expose.

Outside your small group of friends, you're pittied, Grahame.
wow you certainly are a silly young man aren't you. you are the nasty one aren't you. Does that mean that I have revealed to the forum that you are no good with the girls? ;)
« Last Edit: August 19, 2012, 01:20:AM by grahame »

Offline grahameb

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 11830
He seems the guiltiest to me but how could I possibly say.
Well you have said it in the plainest terms so far.

Offline gordo30

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
Lithium you seem to be  addressing a point from a rather comfortable pre established fact that you cannot possible know. The semen(please call it that because thats exactly what it was and not sperm) was found on the t-shirt that was found at the scene. The amount of semen seems to have ranged from the microscopic to the miniscule or to put your own spin on it not able to be seen by the naked eye. There is nothing to say just how large the stain was, although this stain as per the prosecution/investigations case was large enough to transfer from the front of the t-shirt to the inside upper cup of the bra Jodi was wearing at the time.
The forensic team at the time noted the strong smell of detergent coming from the garments gathered up , including the t-shirt. In the process of obtaining DNA from semen a mild detergent is used to break up the lipids so that the solution namely semen can be broken down and what is left are sperm cells that are able to yeild a full profile for DNA examination purpose's. If this t-shirt had been washed then no SEMEN stain would have any relevant reason to exist on this garment, there is a sufficient case to be put forward for innocent transfer of sperm(singular or multiple spermheads being present) for various reasons and some of those you have stated here. I believe even a handshake could in essence transfer various different sources of DNA between two individuals as that is indeed the foundation of the science of DNa to begin with.

I noticed you have managed to not discuss the blood sample as this is not so easily explained away(exept simply just stating you have never heard of this sample before). It does however exist and despite anyones efforts it will always remain. On a t-shirt saturated with Jodi's blood the forensic team managed to not only detect but to firmly establish a full profile of DNA from a blood sample that came from S.Kelly. although If  I remember correctly someone tried to explain away the rain that evening washing away Lukes DNA but managing to preserve the DNA an other individual.

The various alibis for S.Kelly are infact Jodi's sister herself and as I will concur with yourself that it would be insensative to try and link someone connected to Jodi to try and cover up for her murderer it would not be beyond possiblity. Only this week alone and sadly too many times in the past have we seen family covering up for those who have carried out some of the most vile acts upon members of a family. The young 12 year old girl found in her Grandmothers house is testimont to that.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2012, 01:34:AM by gordo30 »

Offline gordo30

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
Quote
Ok so not only did she cover up for him but she stayed in the relationship for some time after what he'd done. Get real lol.

Do you really want me to show you just how many times this has happened over the years or are you happy to carry on with your super silliest ideas that life is not is as we want to see it and take comfort that nothing bad ever happens? FFS only today we had the Brady?Hindley crime thrust down our throats again.

Quote
As for the blood, simple, I don't believe it, it's not mentioned anywhere other than on lukes website probably posted by Sandra. I'd rather see it from an unbiased source. References or it didn't happen.

I would love for you to show me where any of the DNA samples relating to this case appear anywhere else! I have watched you argue points based on the very same samples of DNA to try and prove a point that now becomes redundant due to your non belief of what is put on the official website. I don't know about you as I have only came in and spent a few mins on this but you seem to have spent all night on points you have no belief in as they must have come from the official site.