Author Topic: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones  (Read 197069 times)

0 Members and 6 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #135 on: June 14, 2019, 12:53:PM »
* pinch.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #136 on: June 14, 2019, 01:16:PM »
What about the ones sandra was supporting who later confessed.  Dr sandra leans track record so far is 2 confessions 0 freed.

Simon Hall confessed in circumstances that have never been fully explained. The confession was never made public. Thousands of people supported Simon Hall.

I discussed the Adrian Prout case on an open forum - I was never involved with the case personally - never saw a single case paper.

Quote
A jury heard both sides of the argument for months, much more qualified people than sandra tried to defend him. After months the jury found him guilty. Appeals failed, remember sandras big box? Nothing else has happened  in 16 years because the police caught the right person.

No, they didn't! Potential jurors heard prejudicial media coverage for months - the actual jurors heard 42 days of evidence that most certainly didn't cover "both sides of the argument." After 5 hours deliberation, the jury found him guilty. Are you suggesting there have been no murders of young females in Scotland (or, indeed, the UK) in sixteen years?

Quote
IF corrine is telling the truth, maybe the real reason a lawer wont touch them is because they all believe hes guilty?

What makes you think a lawyer "won't touch them"? You're wrong, btw!

Offline Guiltyascharged

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #137 on: June 14, 2019, 02:50:PM »
Simon Hall confessed in circumstances that have never been fully explained. The confession was never made public. Thousands of people supported Simon Hall.

I discussed the Adrian Prout case on an open forum - I was never involved with the case personally - never saw a single case paper.

No, they didn't! Potential jurors heard prejudicial media coverage for months - the actual jurors heard 42 days of evidence that most certainly didn't cover "both sides of the argument." After 5 hours deliberation, the jury found him guilty. Are you suggesting there have been no murders of young females in Scotland (or, indeed, the UK) in sixteen years?

What makes you think a lawyer "won't touch them"? You're wrong, btw!

Same old sandra,  his wife/famiy can accept it but you cannot or trying to find a way of not admitting your wrong.

Why didnt luke hire you for the trial instead, your skills are being wasted on the Jeremy bamber forum.

What was the falling out/disagreement luke had with you about?


I never said that, corrine did. Not the first time shes lied eh
« Last Edit: June 14, 2019, 02:52:PM by Guiltyascharged »

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #138 on: June 15, 2019, 07:47:AM »
Jodi was spotted arguing with Luke on one side of the path,

The girl was never identified as Jodi - even the appeal judges could only say the jurors were entitled to infer she "may have been" Jodi. The descriptions were nothing like Jodi or Luke. The "identification" of Luke from the polaroid photo has been criticised by top experts and lawyers. The witness who "identified" Luke from the polaroid failed to identify him in court. Before the argument that Luke looked completely different by the time it got to court, this witness said she never so the guy's face and would only be able to identify him by his clothing. The clothing in the polaroid was nothing like the clothing she described the guy she saw wearing.

Stocky man, seen following Jodi just after she left home, was identified (he wasn't Luke), but the police never released that information to the police. One  of the witnesses to stocky man knew Jodi. If the stocky man sighting is correct, the people seen at the entrance to the path couldn't be Luke and Jodi because Jodi hadn't left home by then.

Quote
Luke was then spotted by more than one person  acting suspicious alone on the other side of the path after the time of the murder.

A youth was seen standing against a gate, looking at the pavement. What's "suspicious" about that? He wasn't agitated, trying to flee or covered with blood - just standing there looking at the pavement. If he was the murderer, how and where did he get cleaned up within half an hour of the murder? (And that's not allowing any time for the stripping and mutilating of Jodi's body). The witnesses said they never saw his face but were taken pictures of Luke in the media, by the police, and asked if he was the person they saw. We now know there was another youth on the Newbattle Road that evening and he is probably the person the witnesses saw - a simple case of mistaken identity of another youth who was acting perfectly innocently.

Luke was seen at the end of his street (also on the Newbattle Road, sitting on a wall,  acting perfectly normally. The people who saw him there knew him and positively identified him.

Quote
He phoned Alan Ovens who told him Jodi was on her way to meet him,

Who told him either Jodi was "out" or had "just left" according to his own statements. No mention of going to meet Luke.

Quote
but despite this still went and met a friend and told the friend Jodi wouldn't be coming out because she was grounded.

Met a friend who says Luke told him "Jodi's not coming out." (Nothing about being grounded). The other two friends who were there deny that that was said.

Quote
Why would he say that?

The friend? Because, like so many of the kids involved in this case, he was bullied, browbeaten and threatened until he said what the police wanted him to say.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #139 on: June 15, 2019, 10:09:AM »
Patience, Lithium! You'll have your proof in the not too distant future.

Offline Guiltyascharged

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #140 on: June 15, 2019, 01:12:PM »
Maybe her memory isnt as good today or maybe shes misleading once again,  sandra has a history of that.

How many times have we read comments like that and shes failed to deliver, shame they deleted old forum eh, the stuff they come out with on there!!! remember the  big box? Remember the stuff she came out with in the build up to that and the big attempt for sandra and corrine to arange press to see her walk/deliever it that failed, sandra trying to make a name for herself, hows that going?  Corrines mums attempt to sell her story for 10k.

Theyve now found someone else whos trying to make a name, mr english.  Watching his interviews i thought he looked like he was thinking wtf at times, doubting stuff coming from corine especially. But its all about the views for him, some people will do/use anything to try become famous.

« Last Edit: June 15, 2019, 01:23:PM by Guiltyascharged »

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #141 on: June 15, 2019, 01:35:PM »
I notice on the red forum, there's a discussion about the QC at the appeal saying the DNA in the condom was "no match whatsoever" to James Falconer.

Quote
The defence team alleges that a recently-used condom was found 50 metres from the spot where Jodi was killed, in June 2003. They added that DNA swabs matched a sample taken from Mr Falconer, who they claim also gave false statements to police.

The DNA link, however, has been disputed in court, with prosecutor John Beckett QC telling a recent hearing that DNA from Mr Falconer was "no match whatsoever" with samples collected.

How did he ever get away with that? It was the Crown that discovered the match (when Falconer's DNA was run through the database in relation to another matter) and alerted the defence - what Beckett did in court was deny the Crown's own evidence. Falconer wasn't "identified by Mitchell's defence team" - they were told his DNA matched the DNA from the condom by the Crown!

The defence didn't just "claim" Falconer made false statements to the police - when the police went back to him after finding out the information he'd given them was untrue, he is on record as saying, "I had to say something."

Findlay never explained why he "dropped interest" in Falconer - the first we heard about it was in court that day.

Offline Guiltyascharged

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #142 on: June 15, 2019, 01:51:PM »
How many people have you pointed the finger at over the years sandra, 8-9? Only one person who has so much evidence against, hes not on that list,  hes in jail.

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
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #143 on: June 15, 2019, 05:00:PM »
I notice on the red forum, there's a discussion about the QC at the appeal saying the DNA in the condom was "no match whatsoever" to James Falconer.

How did he ever get away with that? It was the Crown that discovered the match (when Falconer's DNA was run through the database in relation to another matter) and alerted the defence - what Beckett did in court was deny the Crown's own evidence. Falconer wasn't "identified by Mitchell's defence team" - they were told his DNA matched the DNA from the condom by the Crown!

The defence didn't just "claim" Falconer made false statements to the police - when the police went back to him after finding out the information he'd given them was untrue, he is on record as saying, "I had to say something."

Findlay never explained why he "dropped interest" in Falconer - the first we heard about it was in court that day.

it wasnt just lues defence that thought falconers story might be untrue more or less everybody who has heard it does.

even people who think lukes guilty.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #144 on: June 15, 2019, 08:03:PM »
It's certainly a strange story, nugnug!

Someone commenting on the James English podcast asked whether Luke was on any anti-psychotic medication (he wasn't) and that got me thinking. How many people would think psychosis, or people close to the victim or her family, on medication to control psychosis, should have formed part of the police investigation?

Is it ok to say, well, we're focusing on this guy here, so we're not at all concerned about this guy over here with serious psychosis, on the highest dose of anti-psychotic medication (that's not working) whose mental health has been deteriorating in the months leading up to the murder? Especially if that was someone with direct access to the victim?

Just asking!!

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
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #145 on: June 15, 2019, 10:33:PM »
falconer said i had to say somthing so why dident he just tell the trth instead of making up a ridcluss story unless the truth he couldent say to a policeman.

Offline notsure

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1684
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #146 on: June 15, 2019, 10:37:PM »
How many people have you pointed the finger at over the years sandra, 8-9? Only one person who has so much evidence against, hes not on that list,  hes in jail.

I’d give up if I were you. Your arguments contain no facts or truths unlike Sandra’s . It’s obvious she knows this case inside out and has thoroughly investigated this case and has seen all the documents.

As for James English bravo to him for letting them have a voice.

We must allow prisoners protesting their innocence to follow through with appeals etc. Its called human rights. If any one of us were in the same situation we would expect the same . Unfortunately the system is not fair and there is a killer walking the streets. Who is that and where is he. He/she/they should man up and confess as far as I’m concerned he/she/they are bloody cowards on top of being a cold blooded murderer. Someone knows who he/she/they are and they too are cowards. When the truth finally prevails I hope they throw the bloody book at them. They just like Luke will deserve a fair trial and appeal just like Luke.

Offline Guiltyascharged

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 20
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #147 on: June 15, 2019, 10:48:PM »
How many people has she tried to blame,  for someone who knows all the facts and truths why cant she make her mind up or convince the people who really matter?
« Last Edit: June 15, 2019, 10:50:PM by Guiltyascharged »

Offline notsure

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1684
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #148 on: June 16, 2019, 01:02:AM »
How many people has she tried to blame,  for someone who knows all the facts and truths why cant she make her mind up or convince the people who really matter?

There you go again. She isn’t trying to blame anyone. If for example it’s a fact that it was a known persons dna near the scene,  how is her questioning the police and what they did with that information blaming anyone. Truth hurts but needs outing. What would you like to do with information like that. Oh well someone jacked off very near the scene and we know who that was but heyho he wouldn’t have done anything so let’s not talk about it. If someone known that had been on or near the scene changed their appearance immediately after the event shouldn’t we be questioning these things.

I dont get what your motive is for trying to make Sandra into something she isn’t. She has kids Jodie age. Are you seriously asking us to consider that she’s doing this for some other motive.

Offline notsure

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1684
Re: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #149 on: June 16, 2019, 01:06:AM »
Sandra and others are seeking justice for what they believe to be a miscarriage of justice. And by the information that she has bought to light ought to make everyone sit up and take notice that Luke did not get a fair trial.