Author Topic: The murder of 14 year-old schoolgirl Jodi Jones near Edinburgh on 30 June 2003  (Read 1067417 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline nugnug

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 17250
    • 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
findly did qustion her about the conection on the stand i belive.

Offline Baz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
Did Luke mention Shane being in, in his original statement?

Offline Baz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
t.  The claims about Luke making dinner were not borne out by his brothers evidence.

His evidence was that nobody did until his mother arrived home at around 5.30pm.


When did he say this?

The problem with relying so heavily on Shane's evidence, from either point of view, seems to be that at some point he has made statements that support both guilt and innocence. And then when you also factor in his treatment by police, it all just seems too muddled to reach any solid conclusions.

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
When did he say this?

The problem with relying so heavily on Shane's evidence, from either point of view, seems to be that at some point he has made statements that support both guilt and innocence. And then when you also factor in his treatment by police, it all just seems too muddled to reach any solid conclusions.

What about the suggestion that Shane was home alone in his bedroom, with his door ajar, whilst viewing porn on the internet? What has police treatment got to do with this?
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Baz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
What about the suggestion that Shane was home alone in his bedroom, with his door ajar, whilst viewing porn on the internet? What has police treatment got to do with this?

The over zealous police questioning left him unsure about everything. Memory's such a complicated thing and, for me, none of Shane's evidence seems solid enough to build an opinion on, guilty or innocent.

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
The over zealous police questioning left him unsure about everything. Memory's such a complicated thing and, for me, none of Shane's evidence seems solid enough to build an opinion on, guilty or innocent.

Were you there when he was questioned?

Where is he? Why hasn't he ever publicly supported his brother?
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Baz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
Were you there when he was questioned?

Where is he? Why hasn't he ever publicly supported his brother?

No, obviously not. But, I may be wrong, the transcripts of his interviews were part of one of his appeals and it was agreed that their methods were unacceptable.

I don't know anything about Shane's life or choices.

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
No, obviously not. But, I may be wrong, the transcripts of his interviews were part of one of his appeals and it was agreed that their methods were unacceptable.

"The appellant was on 14 August 2003 interviewed under caution by police officers. In the course of the trial the Crown sought to lead before the jury evidence of some but only a few of the questions and answers put and given in the course of that interview. Objection was taken on behalf of the appellant to that course of action but the objection was repelled by the trial judge. The challenge was renewed on appeal, it being maintained that the interview was conducted in circumstances which were wholly and manifestly unfair to the appellant. Having considered the transcript of the interview, we are driven to the conclusion that some of the questions put by the interviewing police officer can only be described as outrageous. At times the nature of the questioning was such that the questioner did not seem to be seriously interested in a response from the appellant but rather endeavouring to break him down into giving some hoped-for confession by his overbearing and hostile interrogation. Such conduct, particularly where the interviewee was a 15 year old youth, can only be deplored. However, the issue for determination in this appeal is whether the answers to the particular questions, which alone the Crown sought to introduce in evidence, were elicited in such circumstances that the trial judge was bound to hold that they were inadmissible. Having considered the response of the appellant throughout and in detail each of the passages in dispute, we are satisfied that the trial judge was entitled to take the course which he did. Moreover, having regard to the context of the questions and responses, many of which related to matters already otherwise properly in evidence, we are not persuaded that on this ground a miscarriage of justice can be said to have resulted."

http://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/luke-mitchell-official-summary-of-appeal-court-decision-1-1259417


« Last Edit: October 19, 2015, 11:03:PM by stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession

I don't know anything about Shane's life or choices.

Why doesn't he publicly support Luke?
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
The over zealous police questioning left him unsure about everything. Memory's such a complicated thing and, for me, none of Shane's evidence seems solid enough to build an opinion on, guilty or innocent.

THE brother of the teenager accused of killing Jodi Jones thought he was alone in his house on the afternoon of her death, a court heard yesterday.

Shane Mitchell, 23, told the High Court he arrived at the family home just before 5pm, about 50 minutes after his brother, Luke, answered a call from his mobile phone to the house landline. Mr Mitchell said he then watched internet pornography in his bedroom and masturbated.

Luke Mitchell's alibi claims he was at home between 5pm and 5.45pm that day.

His brother, a mechanic, told the court he did not remember seeing or hearing anyone until his mother arrived home from work a short time after 5.16pm.

Alan Turnbull, QC, advocate depute, asked Shane Mitchell what he was doing during the internet session. He said he could not remember.

The lawyer then confronted him with photographs of Jodi's mutilated body. Shane Mitchell was visibly shocked and asked for a break. He sat down and drank from a glass of water.

"You look a bit horrified, " said Mr Turnbull. "They are not pleasant, I know, but the reason I have asked you to look at these is so you can appreciate what you are dealing with.

"I can't let embarrassment stand in the way of getting to the bottom of this."

Mr Mitchell, referring to the internet pictures, agreed that he would not normally look at such graphic images, had anyone else been home. He added that he thought he masturbated at the time.

Mr Turnbull said: "Would you have been content to have watched this sort of pornography in that room without a lock on the door, and to have masturbated if someone else was in the house?"

"No, " he said.

"Accordingly, who did you think was in the house?"

Mr Mitchell replied: "No one at that time." He added that he did not hear music being played in Luke's bedroom or the dining room.

"If you had done, you would have recalled you weren't alone, " said Mr Turnbull.

"We come then to where we were a wee while ago, which is this: When you went on the computer to access pornography sites, you thought that the house was empty?"

"Yes, " came the answer.

Mr Turnbull asked: "I want you to reflect on the question whether Luke was there when you went downstairs. Do you think he was there?"

"I don't know, " he said.

The court heard that Luke Mitchell gave a statement to police on July 4, 2003, claiming he had had dinner with his mother, but not his brother, before leaving to meet Jodi that evening. He has previously told police he was at home until 5.30pm or 5.40pm.
     
Luke Mitchell, 16, denies murdering Jodi with a knife or similar instrument on June 30, 2003, and has lodged two special defences of alibi and incrimination. He claims that at the time he was in or around his house at Newbattle Abbey Crescent, Dalkeith, and Jodi was murdered by person or persons unknown.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/12408308.Jodi_trial___brother__apos_alone_in_house_apos__Court_hears_porn_admission/
« Last Edit: October 19, 2015, 11:11:PM by stephanie »
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Baz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
Thanks. Yes that was the thing I was referring to. Overbearing and hostile... Deplored.... Poor kid, must have been horrible.

"I don't know".... I get that it looks bad, and it is one of the few things that stops me from saying I definitely think he's innocent but he doesn't say Luke wasn't in. It just feels undefinitive and doesn't answer all the other questions about his guilt.

Also, why does nobody seem to place as much importance in the changing statements of everyone else... Only Shane.
« Last Edit: October 19, 2015, 11:26:PM by Baz »

Offline Baz

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 136
Why doesn't he publicly support Luke?

Again, I don't know him.

Why doesn't he publicly support Luke?

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Thanks. Yes that was the thing I was referring to. Overbearing and hostile... Deplored.... Poor kid, must have been horrible.

"I don't know".... I get that it looks bad, and it is one of the few things that stops me from saying I definitely think he's innocent but he doesn't say Luke wasn't in. It just feels undefinitive and doesn't answer all the other questions about his guilt.

Also, why does nobody seem to place as much importance in the changing statements of everyone else... Only Shane.

Who for? Luke or Jodie?
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Also, why does nobody seem to place as much importance in the changing statements of everyone else... Only Shane.

Could it be that Shane was Luke's alibi?
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"

Offline Stephanie

  • Veteran Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7614
  • The facts leading to the Simon Hall confession
Again, I don't know him.

Why doesn't he publicly support Luke?

Is it because he believes Luke to be guilty?
“The only people who are mad at you for telling the truth are those people who are living a lie. Keep telling the truth"