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

[gordo30]

Mat it does appear that he was not spotted going home after the murder if your talking about the F&W sighting as surely if their testimony is correct he had no time to go home between 5:42 and just before 6pm at the point he was spotted by the boys on their bikes. So if that was Luke it wasn't him on his way home.

[gordo30]

Hey careful with the old.

Something that is getting old grahame is your need to try and take over this thread with irrrelevant posts that do nothing for anyone wishing to read about this.

[nugnug]

thats a good point gordo he couldent have been in 2 places at ounce and the boys on the bikes would have no reaon to lie.

[gordo30]

No nugnug for me the boys on the bikes was a  diffinative sighting, Im just struggling to find the timeline on the other sites nugnug do you remember if it was taken down on WAP?

[nugnug]

there is still a timline on there its on the wiki page at the top of the forum page.

[gordo30]

Cool I knew it was put somewhere thx.

[gordo30]

That aint the one im talking about as thats to do more with the calls. Is there another?

[guest154]

If you find it, could you copy and paste it here - or post a link please?

[nugnug]

That aint the one im talking about as thats to do more with the calls. Is there another?

i think we did one on another forum  but im not sure avout the acrucy it was a long time ago ill have a look.

[gordo30]

http://wiki.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk/index.php?title=Luke_Mitchell_-_Timeline

This is one.

[Buddy]

back on topic

So you think the quote makes him look guilty then?


(the last post before Chelsea's silliness)


He was cleared of involvement on the basis of alibi. Corroborated by Jodi's sister no less. I have an easier time believing innocent DNA transfer than I do a boy murdering his girlfriends sister, confessing to said sister, then her giving him an alibi and staying in the relationship.

As for Luke's motive, it's been suggested they had a falling out at school that day. An eye witness told police she saw them outside a local chinese at lunchtime smoking a joint, and they were sitting not facing each other or talking to each other. 'as if they had just been arguing'. Police tried to link this argument to a girl Luke met on holiday who he had been in contact with while seeing Jodi. The fact Lukes DNA wasnt on Jodis body also backs the suggestion they were on bad terms that day, ie no hugging or contact. Prosecution suggest their was a meeting arranged between Luke and Jodi behind the V cut in the wall, (the half way mark basically for both of them) where they were going to have it out about this other girl. This is purely speculation by me: Jodi's mobile phone was broken around the time of the murder, so her using Luke's mobile could be one possibility for her finding out about the other girl. She and Luke had been texting regularly.

Thanks for the reply Lithium. I am still troubled by the dna though. Is it known how Jodi got on with her sister?
It would not be the first time a girl protected her boyfriend.
How old was her sister. I only ask because I am assuming that the sister was more developed than Jodi, and the shirt may have been a little baggy on Jodi.
Did Jodi's sister marry the boyfriend? Are they still married.
It seems this case is full of lies and deciet from all parties.
On the balance of probability, I would suggest that Luke is innocent. Nothing convinces me of guilt, just another bungled operation by the[lazy] police.

[Roch]

Right, I'm off now - can't keep up with all this stuff. I came here to discuss MoJs - it's virtually impossible to do so with all the other squabbles going on - I don't know who's who, or what your various gripes are with each other, but really, there's no way of having any sensible debate in the midst of this.

I hope you return.  I have to agree that non case related squabbles, on case related threads are not helpful at all.  It's sometimes difficult not to intervene to question somebody.  Unfortunately the resulting tangents just take over the thread.

[nugnug]

Thanks for the reply Lithium. I am still troubled by the dna though. Is it known how Jodi got on with her sister?
It would not be the first time a girl protected her boyfriend.
How old was her sister. I only ask because I am assuming that the sister was more developed than Jodi, and the shirt may have been a little baggy on Jodi.
Did Jodi's sister marry the boyfriend? Are they still married.
It seems this case is full of lies and deciet from all parties.
On the balance of probability, I would suggest that Luke is innocent. Nothing convinces me of guilt, just another bungled operation by the[lazy] police.

her sister was 17 at the time jodi was 14.

[guest154]

I believe guilt too, what I do with a MOJ case is approach the case with the knowledge that this person has been convicted in a court of law, so there is something there.

Then go back to the start - the evidence used at trial, where it came from. How it was interpreted by the prosecution. Look at the prosecutions case, who was in charge?

Then look at the defence - their statements after the trial, the appeals, what their arguments are as to why LM is innocent and the polcie, the prosecution, the jury got it wrong - where they mis-led by the prosecution of were the defence right and it is the prosecutions who's interpretation of the evidence is wrong.

When you've done that - then what do you believe ... who does your head tell you is right, defence or prosecution.

For me this case always comes back to the prosecution and I'm struggling to find anything to point me to innocence.

[nugnug]

I believe Jodi and her sister were as close as any 2 sisters are, and didn't have any problems. Jodi was probably similar size to her older sister as she was quite tall for her age, you probably noticed nugnug mention she was taller than Luke, like this would somehow make her strong enough to fight him off if he were to attack her unexpectedly with a knife. Kelly and Jodi's sister never married and both went their seperate ways. Jodi's sister was a lesbian last I heard. Not that that matters, might not even be true. I'm the opposite, I think Luke probably is guilty. I do agree the investigation was a shambles but it doesn't mean Luke isn't guilty anyway, and none of the arguments from his supporters convince me enough to change my mind. Jodi's brother, her sisters boyfriend, her 2 cousins, are just some of the people they accuse and post 'evidence' against, and I find the circumstancial evidence against Luke to be more damning than any of the above. I accept he could be innocent though it's just not my opinion. Just like none of his supporters in here actually know for a fact that he's innocent. Alot of the 'evidence' that he's innocent has been greatly exagerated by the members on Luke's forum. Maybe not even deliberately, just that it's been mentioned so much over a long period of time. In reality most of it is so weak that Donald Findlay didn't even think it was worth mentioning as it could be so easily picked apart.

jodi was also a fair bit taler  than her sister.

her sister and kelly got maried they split up afterwords ive never heard anyhing about her being a lesbian where did you get that from.