Author Topic: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003  (Read 1055509 times)

0 Members and 46 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline OnceSaid

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1198
That incident was obviously after the murder. His little sister was murdered, someone has been locked up for it, Sandra is telling the world he didn't do it, without actually knowing. It is a very normal human reaction to go to her door and confront her about the hurt she is causing his family. Keep in mind this is a family totally convinced of Luke's guilt after weighing up all options.

I disagree, especially as you say "this is a family totally convinced of Luke's guilt after weighing up all options".  As you say, "someone has been locked up for it", so why wasn't her brother laughing his head off at Dr Lean saying Luke "didn't do it", instead of going to her home threatening her.

Offline gordo30

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
I think that clears up the DNA found from Jodi on Lukes clothing. We knew about this from very early on and was discussed on the WAP forum. The type of material that Jodi's DNA was extracted from is the reason why this went no where in court. Without any traces of blood its impossible  to consider that these trouser were worn at the scene of a murder and then cleaned of any blood but then have Jodi's DNA present.

Quote
10G – Blood, labelled “o/s front piece of shirt (2).

Im not sure you can interpret this any other  way than this samply being blood. The fact that a full profile that is attributed to SK was taken from this sample and labelled blood while the other sample was only 8/20 makers and therefore of less importance in relation to the sample. I was wondering is the (2) here does it mean 2 samples of blood i.e sk's and Jodis?

Sry Sandra I see from the semen sample that it does indeed suggest that 2 samples exist and were tested. I have then to say that both samples have to be blood as Jodi's couldn't possibly have been anything else.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 01:17:PM by gordo30 »

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17245
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
I disagree, especially as you say "this is a family totally convinced of Luke's guilt after weighing up all options".  As you say, "someone has been locked up for it", so why wasn't her brother laughing his head off at Dr Lean saying Luke "didn't do it", instead of going to her home threatening her.

well its rather strange as he wasn't being accused of anything at the time.

Offline OnceSaid

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1198
nugnug how would you feel if you had the role of the man of your house hold and someone was causing your mother the distress Sandra has caused Jodi's mother?

Joseph Jones did not have the role of the household, he was treated like a child, everyone pussyfooted round about him, walking on eggshells, so as not to upset him.  It is common knowledge his family feared him.  Alan Ovens was supposed to have been the man in the house, but he couldn't even be bothered to get off his lazy backside and go and search for her, leaving his 17 year old stepdaughter and her boyfriend, and the elderly grandmother to go out looking for her. 

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17245
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
well there may have been other reasons he dident join the search party.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 01:52:PM by nugnug »

Offline OnceSaid

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1198
Janine said so. simple as that.

Or maybe she was lying to protect her boyfriend who raped and murdered her young sister?

That is a terrible thing to suggest!  I don't believe for one minute that she would have given him an alibi if she had thought that.  Jodi was not raped, why are you mentioning that?  Do you believe she was?

Janine hadn't a clue if it were her teeshirt or not, I think that much is pretty obvious.

Offline OnceSaid

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1198
Do you know Steven kelly Lithium? Tell me more about the parka....

Did Steven Kelly have a parka?

Offline gordo30

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
The parka is a misnoma m8 its only exists in the mind of the prosecution.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Transcript of Interview, 4th July 2003:

After discussing what Luke was wearing on Monday night at page 44, and then some discussion about whether or not Luke and Jodi wore school uniform (they didn’t).

At P45, after discussing who bought both Luke and Jodi’s clothes, the following discussion is recorded:

DC: Oh, right, OK. Was Jodi the same, did she buy her

LM: She liked that top, she like, she bought some of her own stuff, I mean, the clothes, the cords, jeans, she was wearing on Monday night. I think they were borrowed off her sister.

DC: Mm-mm and eh what else was she wearing on Monday?

LM: Eh, a black Deftones, it was like this, it had the zip, but it was black and it had Deftones written across the back, and there, and there

DC: Aye

LM: It had sort of, a sort of distorted sort of circley oval, it had sort of, it was like a yellowy orange

DC: Yeah

LM: Band sort of thing.

DC: anything else that you can, that strikes oot or...

LM: I can’t remember the top, I mean she had her hoody zipped up most of the time so..

DC: Oh, right, aye

LM: She had her sort of navy blue DCs on- DC trainers

DC: Right

ADS: When was this, sorry?

LM: This was Monday.

DC: Monday

LM: Well, I don’t know if she changed out of them, but that’s what, cause I never saw her after school.

DC: Aye

LM: Until I found her, but... that’s what she was wearing at school.

At page 114, same transcript

DC: Right, OK, what clothes were you wearing on Monday evening?
(LM describes his clothes)

DC: What clothes was Jodi wearing?

LM: Eh, I only saw the ones she was wearing at school were blue cords

At page 135, same transcript:

DC... and what clothes were you wearing that night?
(LM describes his clothes again)

DC: Yeah the same as you had been wearing at school, eh?

LM: Yeah

DC: Eh, and what was Jodi wearing

LM: Well, at school, she was wearing, I’m sure it was the blue cords she borrowed off her sister, I’m sure, with her black Deftones hoody, zip up hoody like this in black, Deftones across the back... and there, and there...


Offline OnceSaid

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1198
I've just found out who nugnug is. :)

He said he wasn't impressed with how I outed Chelsea so quickly for using fake pics.

He'l be impressed by this though.

Should I expose him?

Does anyone really care who he is?  I don't.  I'm supposed to be nugnug as well as many others, and he has been accused of being so many others too.  We are who we are, just anonymous posters on an internet forum.  People have outed people before claiming they are such and such, post pictures of a person etc but when all is said and done, it still isnt a proven fact they are who the outer says they are.  It's all pretty pointless, as it would make no difference if nugnug is Tom Cruise, or Roch is Ricky Hatton, we are all still entitled to an opinion and will offer it and join in on debates.  Nugnug has been around for years, I can't imagine the threat of being outed, or actually being outed would stop him from posting his opinions on miscarriage of justice cases.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
A final qute from the transcript of July 4th, which I find quite telling:

CM: Why was I not told at the house that the house was gonna be searched, why was it left til I was up here - that was a bit of a shock.

ADS: Well, we were provided with a warrant, do you just want to conclude this and then we'll answer

DC: aye

ADS: address any concerns Mrs Mitchell's got

DC: We'll do that, aye. Eh, we'll just, I'll switch the tapes off

ADS: So that's eh

DC: in case they stop again

ADS: 1652

DC: 1652. The time is 1652 ours on Friday the 4th of july, this is DC SQ concluding the interview with Lue Mitchell that took place in Dalkeith Police Station.

What' no answer on tape as to why they waited until they'd got Luke and Corinne out of the house and at the station bfore telling them it was going to be searched? No denial on tape that they'd done so?


Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17245
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
please expose if you want.

i might expose myself in a little now thats something you really dont want to see.

Offline gordo30

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
So Sandra the fact that Luke was describing the clothes Jodi wore  at school that day and they happened to be the same clothes Jodi wore at the time of her murder then somehow that morphed itself into him having knowledge of what she had on that night. This really is clutching at straws. Its clear what Luke was saying and I will apologise that he did inadvertantly describe the clothes Jodi wore when she was killed.

I feel however the problem here was simply the Daily Records article and I can't really blame the poster lithium for clutching at straws on this one, just goes to show you what they say about the press. Shame you had to take the time out of an already busy day to address this issue but thx.

This does however pose a problem and also confirms that Jodi going up and changing before going out is wrong(another wrong). I hadn't actually realised that it was possible she hadn't changed anything at all. I also see where the police got the idea that Jodi swapped clothes with her sister but If Luke knew that certain items of clothing that Jodi had on were indeed her sisters and he named them ie the jeans why not also name the t-shirt, at that stage he could not have known that any forensics would have been garnered from that item so he wasn't implacating himself or anyone else by doing so.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17245
    • http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CDMQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fjohnnyvoid.wordpress.com%2F&ei=WTdUUo3IM6mY0QWYz4GADg&usg=AFQjCNE-8xtZuPAZ52VkntYOokH5da5MIA&bvm=bv.5353710
well if she had clean clothes on in the morning she wouldn't needed. have to have changed.

it could well be that she dident have time to change.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 02:40:PM by nugnug »

Neil

  • Guest
Does anyone really care who he is?  I don't.  I'm supposed to be nugnug as well as many others, and he has been accused of being so many others too.  We are who we are, just anonymous posters on an internet forum.  People have outed people before claiming they are such and such, post pictures of a person etc but when all is said and done, it still isnt a proven fact they are who the outer says they are.  It's all pretty pointless, as it would make no difference if nugnug is Tom Cruise, or Roch is Ricky Hatton, we are all still entitled to an opinion and will offer it and join in on debates.  Nugnug has been around for years, I can't imagine the threat of being outed, or actually being outed would stop him from posting his opinions on miscarriage of justice cases.


Well said, OnceSaid!  I couldn't agree more.