Author Topic: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003  (Read 1055519 times)

0 Members and 46 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline gordo30

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
Quote
So no one should comment when they see people posting things they disagree with? One quick example being Luke having none of Jodi's DNA on him. Do you want the thread to be one-sided or fair?

If you had read the WAP forum you will have seen this discussed so how then could we make the statement that no DNA from Jodi was found on Luke, unless of course we were talking about the case and relevant DNA that is.

Offline gordo30

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
No

Dont you think the family heard everything you've read and more? Do you think they dont have a mind of their own?

Sorry m8 you have lost me here not sure what the no refers to and why would I think the family wouldn't have read everything, of course they have we have spoken with them on forums over the years, and to add I believe that everyone has a mind of their own.

Offline gordo30

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
What theory are you talking about?

LOL ok m8 what you really want me to do is say something online that may leave me open to criminal proceedings? or maybe you hoping that I reveal something that may be detrimental to the SCCRC application or resulting police investigation if Luke is found innocent? or are you trying to guage which way future discussion might go? c'mon m8 I might have came to in a shower of rain but it wasn't last night.
« Last Edit: August 22, 2012, 05:30:PM by gordo30 »

Offline gordo30

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
Everyone in the area knows he did it. Everyone relevant to the case knows he did it.

I was wondering why you told a blatant lie here? I take it the NO was a no to you being from the area or knowing the family! so why the lie?

Offline gordo30

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 767
OK m8 goodnight.

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

Keep in mind Ferris was one of the first to say "it was Luke" and he even handed a knife of Lukes in to police, maybe he did want to help with the investigation as much as he could nd point them in the right direction without implicating himself.  He could still face charges to this day for his dishonesty  which would explain his "leave me alone" comments to people tracking him down.

and of course the word of a self confesed drug dealer means everything.

guest154

  • Guest
and of course the word of a self confesed drug dealer means everything.

Not solely. But added to the rest of the evidence it counts for something.

guest154

  • Guest
When it comes to MOJ cases - there is always the chance that the person in jail is just screaming to get out when really they aren't a MOJ but an actual murderer.  The LM case is one of the only cases I have come across where I am shocked that there are followers of the murderer, shocked that people can actually find ways in convincing themselves that LM is innocent.

guest154

  • Guest
I've not heard that before. Whilst he was supposedly sat at home - he was using his mobile phone to call the talking clock?

Neil

  • Guest
I've not heard that before. Whilst he was supposedly sat at home - he was using his mobile phone to call the talking clock?
Sandra said in an earlier post, that evidence was produced in court, that shows Luke often used to call the speaking clock from home.

Neil

  • Guest
Yea from home. so why, this time, did he use his mobile?
The way I understood it was, he would often call the speaking clock, from his mobile whilst in the house.  This sounded odd to me but apparently they could pinpoint the call from the mast records.  I don't believe that any records could have pinpointed where calls from the mobile were made.  Maybe to within a mile or so but no more accurate than that.  I stand to be corrected.

Neil

  • Guest
So there's absolutely no proof he's ever called it from his mobile while being inside his house then ...
I agree.  I'm sure that Sandra suggested otherwise earlier in the thread.

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 would gues someone might call the speaking clock becouse they wanted to know the right time because they clock or watch is wrong.

Neil

  • Guest
i would gues someone might call the speaking clock becouse they wanted to know the right time because they clock or watch is wrong.
Yes, I think it has been suggested that the kitchen clock was unreliable but when he called the speaking clock from his mobile, how can it be proved that he did so from within the house?

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
im not sure they could probably track the phone signal.