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

[nugnug]

I didn't tell you not to post. I told you I'd rather not read them. Remember what I said about reading comprehension? I refuse to believe you're actually this dim. Drop the act, whos fake-account are you?

Congratulations on another post which contains absolutely no substance.

well dont read them then simples

[maggie]

Oh look another  post without substance by nugnug.

Lithium, the way you speak to nugnug is very rude.
Surely you can make your points without being so offensive?

[nugnug]

Can I ask why you think it's impossible? Are you basing it on the assumption that you think you know the killer would have to be covered in blood? Or that you know the time of death? He was witnessed arguing with Jodi on one end of the path, then later at the other end alone looking like he had been up to no good. He obviously had time to do it. These witnesses have no reason to lie. AB identified his picture and said she was as sure as anyone can possibly be that that was the same person she saw. I don't care if he looked different a year later and court and she was honest enough to say she couldn't recognise him by that point.

the witness were not showed a line up witch means the police knew they wouldent pick him out from one.

meaning the police knew they wernt credible witneses.

[maggie]

I find nugnug offensive.

Why? Nugnug has posted on here for ages, what has he done to you?

[gordo30]

Not completely but I would go with the acting pathologist on this one as he is more qualified to make such a claim, he stated that there would be a fair amount of blood on the killer. Its not of course just that we have someone murdering someone in a woodland area,we have movement of the body as well as post mortem cuts and other strange things going on. We have the murderer putting himself in a position to have skins cells under his nails, his sweat on the body,clothes ect. We have other possiblities that he would have been scratched by the victim or damaged in some way and or by the shrubbery/trees in the imediate area. Im sure you can gauge just what im saying here that in a situation like was occurring at this point there are ample reasons why he should have a veriety of forensics placing him at the scene.

Is it possible to wash it off? all of it! well lets see he would also have to decontaminate everywhere he touched for instance( the police took apart the drainage system in his house), clean the carpets or floors in the house for instance you see what im getting at. Can he do all this ? even with the help of his mother it would be impossible to get rid of everything that may point to him having carried out this crime. There is a crime being discussed on this forum just now where there were microscopic bloodlets that led to the conviction, these must have existed in this case also as there was far more blood around as well as agitation of the body. So its not just what you can see that had to be washed off but everything else you can't.

So all in all I would sayit was impossible yes.

[gordo30]

missed this post. Joey Jones conducts a regular life and is a functioning member of society. He is engaged and he delivers prescriptions and medication for a pharmecutical company. This is all fact.
A job which holds a level of trust and responsibility, don't you agree?

I think the post wasn't missed just simply not relevant to the discussion. How J Jones conducts himself 9 years on has no relevance although Im pleased to see he has managed to get well na dbecome a piller of society.
I see hwoever your admittance to how he was 9 years before somehow alludes me.

[gordo30]

Can't have it both ways as I keep repeating.

LOL yeah you do and I keep contradicting you .

Jodi had no reportable results from samples under her nails. I just stated that the killer put himself in a position whereby he may well have been injured by the victim,  I used nails as an example.

[nugnug]

missed this post. Joey Jones conducts a regular life and is a functioning member of society. He is engaged and he delivers prescriptions and medication for a pharmecutical company. This is all fact.
A job which holds a level of trust and responsibility, don't you agree?

What difference is it weather she recognised his picture or saw him in a line up? Did the police take the picture in a way to make Luke like the person she saw arguing with Jodi? how could they?

it wasnt a case of "hes the only one on there who matches the description" her words were "i'm as sure as i can possibly be thats the person I saw"

she was adamant.

A year later in court Luke looked completely different, much longer hair, a year of growing and puberty. She was being honest saying she couldn't recognise him. I wouldn't use that as a supporting argument at all.

i dont know what joe jones does so ive only really got your word for that.


showing someoneand useing a line are completly difrrent.

the proper procedure is to use a line up the police know that.

theres only one reason not to use one that is you know your alleged witnes wont be able to pick him out from one.

t

[nugnug]

Yet Jodi had no ones DNA under her finger nails. Can't have it both ways as I keep repeating.


"I see hwoever your admittance to how he was 9 years before somehow alludes me."

The point I'm making is, if he had this horrific history of mental illness and violent crime which WAP claims, he wouldn't have got the job. I know for a fact such a role requires CRB and background checks.


Funny you say "how he is 9 years later has no relevance to how he was at the time of the murder"

yet its ok for nugnug to mention he threatened Sandra Lean 9 years later???

Can't have it both ways!!!

well one i see know evidence for your claims.

and in 9 years a man can change dramatically.

[gordo30]

Funny you say "how he is 9 years later has no relevance to how he was at the time of the murder"

yet its ok for nugnug to mention he threatened Sandra Lean 9 years later???

I thought we were talking about his mental state. I am comparing his mental state now 9 years later to what it was 9 years earlier. If someone has the personallity whereby he becomes violent which was 3 years ago if im correct. Do you know what his mental state was 3 years earlier?

[gordo30]

I guess if you read my posts  they all contain questions, Im really looking for your opinion on what I have written as oppossed to more questions, but either way its fine.

[gordo30]

Steph the good thing is  no matter who lithium is that the case remains in the public arena here. It gives me a good chance to go over everything again and believe it or not it actully has in the past given me even further insights into events by seeing other peoples perspectives. The perspectives have only helped to increase my resolve in Lukes innocence.

[gordo30]

Im just happy to be discussing the case, be it with you or John. I like John hes funny. So no problems here m8. BTW what age are you, just wondering.

[gordo30]

Was that DNA incriminating though? Did it even belong to the case of murder in question here, Im sure you were aware Jodi and Luke were an item.

[gordo30]

Jodi and luke were together a numbers of weeks prior to her death, would it be sensible for anyone to declare that no DNA would have been apparent between the two anywhere, or is it possible that when the statements about no DNA of Jodi on Luke that we  refers to the case.