Re: The murder of Jodi Jones

[nugnug]

Why did Corinne tell James English the police done nothing about the guys who vandalized Scotts Caravans? They were charged, convicted and sentenced for it.

STOP.

LYING.

!!!!

do you have any proof of this.

[nugnug]

https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/probation-for-vandal-attack-on-mitchell-mother-s-site-1-981769

(These boys are not Joey's friends either ftr - random local neds who had no idea it was Luke's mum's business)

Why did Corinne tell James the police did nothing?

I'm just sick of all the lying.

probely becouse there was more than one atack

and why do ou say they were not mates of joe i dont recall anybody saying they were.

[nugnug]

Was just pointing out the sword in response to Gordo saying he wasn't interested in blades. I don't remember me or any of my 14 year old pals having an actual saber by our bedroom door. The gypo comment didn't have anything to do with his guilt, it was in response to AD asking if she was into witchcraft etc. Yes I should have probably said "gypsy" but that's just how I speak. Do I really have to dig up some of the things Sandra/Corinne have called Jodi's family?

The evidence I'd highlight to prove his guilt would be the missing knife, the missing parka, both replaced after the murder the knife sheath "tribute",possibly the burning in the garden that multiple independent neighbours reported, the brother destroying the alibi, the witnesses to Luke and Jodi arguing, Luke's history and interests, Luke deleting his texts to Jodi to cover up the fact he arranged to meet her at Easthouses (I saw Sandra in her book claiming "oh but Judith deleted them too!, emm no, what kind of teenage girl would leave texts of her arguing with her boyfriend on her mums phone for her mum to read... why did Luke delete the texts? And also his call history?)

Luke phoning the speaking clock, the fact she would only be over there with a boyfriend, Luke's complete lack of emotion throughout the entire thing, his violent writings, the stabbing of Jodi's leg shortly before the murder - confirmed by several friends of Luke. The previous knife attack on his girlfriend at the army cadets, the partial DNA match, finding the body in the dark, claiming it was the dog despite the dog not alerting him on the way up, walking directly past it. Being able to describe the body down to a "red scrunchie" which was hidden underneath Jodi's hair. Waiting for an hour on Jodi then suddenly meeting with friends then going home and not trying to find out why Jodi didn't turn up. Some common sense has to applied to this case. Everything from hanging around for an hour "looking suspicious" then spending the night with pals getting himself dirty, was all an attempt at an alibi. The other girlfriend he was arranging to meet. The fact Luke's close friends at the time have no problem believing he did it, much like his dad and brother Shane. I could go on all day.

I'd really love to see the circumstancial case Sandra would build against "the boyfriend" if it was JJ, MK, GD, SK, or JF sitting in jail right now for the murder claiming they were innocent.

the only person who cliamed luke stabed jodi in the leg was john ferris the man who could not explian what he was doing t the murder scene.

[nugnug]

talking of swords dident jodis brother own one as well

[nugnug]

Proof?

e.g. a picture of Joseph's bedroom at the time?

the prood being he atacked somebody with one

that woud sort of suggest ownership.

[nugnug]

Which of the Mitchells hid the Bowie knife in the dog food before the police searched the place? Just some more strange but perfectly innocent behaviour eh.

non it never happend

[Bullseye]

Was just pointing out the sword in response to Gordo saying he wasn't interested in blades. I don't remember me or any of my 14 year old pals having an actual saber by our bedroom door. The gypo comment didn't have anything to do with his guilt, it was in response to AD asking if she was into witchcraft etc. Yes I should have probably said "gypsy" but that's just how I speak. Do I really have to dig up some of the things Sandra/Corinne have called Jodi's family?

The evidence I'd highlight to prove his guilt would be the missing knife, the missing parka, both replaced after the murder the knife sheath "tribute",possibly the burning in the garden that multiple independent neighbours reported, the brother destroying the alibi, the witnesses to Luke and Jodi arguing, Luke's history and interests, Luke deleting his texts to Jodi to cover up the fact he arranged to meet her at Easthouses (I saw Sandra in her book claiming "oh but Judith deleted them too!, emm no, what kind of teenage girl would leave texts of her arguing with her boyfriend on her mums phone for her mum to read... why did Luke delete the texts? And also his call history?)

Luke phoning the speaking clock, the fact she would only be over there with a boyfriend, Luke's complete lack of emotion throughout the entire thing, his violent writings, the stabbing of Jodi's leg shortly before the murder - confirmed by several friends of Luke. The previous knife attack on his girlfriend at the army cadets, the partial DNA match, finding the body in the dark, claiming it was the dog despite the dog not alerting him on the way up, walking directly past it. Being able to describe the body down to a "red scrunchie" which was hidden underneath Jodi's hair. Waiting for an hour on Jodi then suddenly meeting with friends then going home and not trying to find out why Jodi didn't turn up. Some common sense has to applied to this case. Everything from hanging around for an hour "looking suspicious" then spending the night with pals getting himself dirty, was all an attempt at an alibi. The other girlfriend he was arranging to meet. The fact Luke's close friends at the time have no problem believing he did it, much like his dad and brother Shane. I could go on all day.

I'd really love to see the circumstancial case Sandra would build against "the boyfriend" if it was JJ, MK, GD, SK, or JF sitting in jail right now for the murder claiming they were innocent.

Thanks for that, I have put below my thoughts on this below
 
Missing Knife and missing parka – I’m not convinced there was a missing knife, but I’m not 100% on the parka, due to the teachers statement
 
Knife sheath tribute – seems the knife from this was handed in to police, but it’s too small to be the murder weapon, could be a tribute to someone he loved and lost or could be a trophy as a reminder of the murder, but not enough info and not enough to show guilt
 
Burning in the garden – does not mean it was disposing stuff, also if there was a parka I don’t think it would be burned here.
 
Brother alibi – This for me is the biggest flag,lyn it’s been said he did say Luke was home and that he could not be sure, would love to hear him confirm now
 
Luke and Jodi - witness them argue – if this is AB she did not identify Luke in court, which for me is huge, ok he may have looked a bit different but she knew that was Luke so it’s a simple yes or no, she said she could not be sure), therefore not a positive sighting, I discarded this info
 
Luke’s history and interests – this information is hugely conflicted, I’m sure everyone had a story about Luke after he was arrested. Find it hard sort the fact from the hearsay
 
Luke deleting text, did he usually do this> if not then its suspicious (but nothing to say, as you do, that it was to cover up the fact he arranged to meet Jodi, we do not know the contents of the messages, please can we keep to the facts at hand)
 
You asked why he would delete the texts, the phones back then did not have a lot of space, I use to delete all my texts after I was done with them as it filled up my phone fast, but as I said it be good to know if this was usual practice for his messages to be deleted.
 
Luke phoning the speaking clock, not in any way suspicious to me
 
Jodi only going over the wall with Luke - As already discussed she would also go over there with the 2 boys who were at the v at 1715, I’m sure there are a few more people she would go over there with also, not just Luke.
 
Luke complete lack of emotion (been explained he was on medication) I can accept that but it is a bit suspicious to me also.
 
Violent writings – cannot comment without seeing the facts and not hearsay but does not mean he was a killer, could just be
 
stabbing Jodi in leg, threats to ex gf, - hearsay (was this used in court)not something I’d take as evidence if not.
 
Partial DNA, is a partial and can be a number of people including Luke, also there were partials that were not Luke. Semen full profile, not Luke, etc. More dna evidence for others rather than Luke.
 
Finding the body in the dark – he had a dog that was trained as a tracker, I’d be more surprised if he did not find her.(and I’m sure you guys would be using it to prove his guilt also if the dig did not find her)
 
Dog not alerting on way up as not asked to search for Jodi on way up and also Luke was pulling her up the path, a trained dog does what its told, if its told to search it does if its told to move it also does.
 
Describing the red scrunchie, does sound strange but without seeing the crime scene hard for me to say but yes sounds fishy
 
Waiting for Jodi then going to meet friends, not suspicious, I accept the explanation that he thought she had gone elsewhere, or got grounded, did not call back as did not want to get her in any trouble.
 
We do not know if Shane and his dad supports Luke or not, have been assured the both do but until the speak out sorry I do not take your word on that, again hearsay

[Bullseye]

No knife was found hidden in Mia's dog food? Are you sure?

Was it not found in a bag under the table that’s mia’s dog bowl/food sat on?

[Bullseye]

I'm not saying a parka was burned in the garden either. Things could easily have been disposed of in a bin somewhere. Unchecked by L&B. Something was burned though. I'm not saying it was Corinne or that Corinne even knows about it. I don't think she would have noticed if Luke was out there burning something like gloves, or whatever that's what the eye witness seen building from his pocket.

Agreed, I think if there was a parka that could be disposed of elsewhere. Anyone could have been burning anything, the neighbours may also be mistaken on the day or who was having the fire. Again to many questions and not enough answers on this.

[Bullseye]

Yes, a bag of dog biscuits lol.

And the speaking clock is suspicious to me when it was during a time he was claiming to be at home. Just doesn't make sense. Like I said, some common sense has to be applied here with regards to strange and unrealistic behaviour.

Ah I did not know it was a dog food bag I thought it was an ordinary bag, do you know that for a fact?

Luke called the speaking clock all the time, phone records show this, if he was home I think he may have called the speaking clock for timing as he was making dinner. You said common sense needs to be applied, I can only go by my constant use of the speaking clock when I was younger. Just because you don’t use it does not mean it was suspicious, I’d say that’s common sense also.

[Bullseye]

Have you seen these phone records? And how do they prove that he was at home when placing those calls, if they do indeed exist?

I have not seen them, going by info give here which I trust, but I don’t think you would to be fair.

Does not prove he was home  but also does not prove he was out. Not unusual behaviour to call 123 for him tho.

[Bullseye]

Luke's lack of reaction upon verdict is evidence of something amiss mentally to me. Who cares if the judge says you can't show emotion, it's not something you can choose to show. If I get sentenced for a murder I didn't commit I'd be screaming and shouting and having a total meltdown. Luke was calmly escorted to the reliance van and didn't look one bit bothered. He  possibly was already resigned to this being a likely outcome from the minute he decided to murder Jodi, either that or he's just a psychopath/sociopath. Pictures taken through the blacked out windows of reliance vans show him smirking. He swaggered about Polmont smirking and lapping up his notoriety. He was also enjoying the police interviews, playing the villain and provoking them. Turning up at his appeals with ridicuous haircuts and facial piercings. Writings and letters from Luke throughout his entire incarceration show someone who doesn't give a fuck. He's probably secretly laughing at Sandra. Yes in the past few years he's actually came out and said a few things, but really what has he got to lose.

Agreed, if I was found guilty of something I did not do the judge could go and f*** himself,  Id be going nuts and everyone in the courthouse and outside would here me scream I was innocent

[nugnug]

Luke's lack of reaction upon verdict is evidence of something amiss mentally to me. Who cares if the judge says you can't show emotion (and I don't believe he said this to the defendant, this usually is aimed at people in the gallery), it's not something you can choose to show. If I get convicted for a murder I didn't commit I'd be screaming and shouting and having a total meltdown. Luke was calmly escorted to the reliance van and didn't look one bit bothered. He  possibly was already resigned to this being a likely outcome from the minute he decided to murder Jodi, either that or he's just a psychopath/sociopath. Pictures taken through the blacked out windows of reliance vans show him smirking. He swaggered about Polmont smirking and lapping up his notoriety. He was also enjoying the police interviews, playing the villain and provoking them. Turning up at his appeals with ridicuous haircuts and facial piercings. Writings and letters from Luke throughout his entire incarceration show someone who doesn't give a fuck. He's probably secretly laughing at Sandra. Yes in the past few years he's actually came out and said a few things (at the request of his mum and Sandra), but really what has he got to lose.

its the same reaction more or less everybody has.

[sandra L]

I'm not going to quote all the individual posts - I'll just list the pertinent points. I'll indicate where I have documents that I can post (either in full, or excerpts, depending on what the legal situation allows) but please bear with me - there are hundreds of documents in no order whatsoever, and I have to sort all of them - I will post what I find, as I find it, rather than searching through all the boxes for specific documents. If someone wants to keep a record of this post, they can tick off the information I've made public and keep a list of what I haven't yet found.

The knife hidden in the dog food.
It wasn't a "bowie knife" as stated and it wasn't hidden in a bag of dog biscuits. It was in a holdall under a table on which the dog's food and water bowls sat. (Statements available).

Luke and Jodi's texts
No evidence that the arrangement was to meet at Easthouses or that they were arguing. Bryson's evidence was used to suggest Jodi went down the path in the direction of Newbattle - why would Luke walk all the way to Easthouses if they were going to be hanging out in Newbattle? Jodi's gran said, if Jodi was going to Newbattle, she would walk down the path alone and Luke would meet her at the Newbattle end. Janine said in court her mother knew "perfectly well" that Jodi used the path alone. (AW statement and JaJ court transcript available).

Luke deleting texts and call history
He had no recollection of deleting texts. We now know that the call history was deleted just after 12.30am on July 1st - when the phone was in the possession of the police. We also know a text was sent from Luke's phone in this same time period and, although Luke was later grilled about "checking his voicemail" while standing on the path, waiting for the police, the records show, quite clearly, that this was a log of an incoming voicemail from Corinne asking where he was, being recorded on his phone, not Luke checking it . Since the police clearly interfered with the phone by deleting the call record  and allowing a text to be sent while the phone was in their possession, we can never be sure if it was Luke who deleted the earlier texts or not. All we have are his police statements that he had no recollection of doing so - from that, the police questioned him about what reasons he might have had for deleting them. Fair enough, you'd think, but that was exactly the line of questioning they used  when questioning him about why he thought Jodi hadn't turned up. Luke tried to think of various reasons and they later used that against him to suggest he was "lying." (Phone records and interview transcripts available).

Red scrunchie
A news reporter interviewed Luke "off the record" - he'd scribbled a note in his notebook, "red scrunchie?" He could not remember whether that was his own wording or a comment directly from Luke, or what the circumstances surrounding it were. This was several weeks after the murder - from memory, after the August 14th interrogation in which officers asked Luke what Jodi usually used if her hair was tied up. It was used in court to suggest it "must have been" a direct comment from Luke, since the reporter wouldn't, ordinarily, have used the term "scrunchie." That was then expanded to infer that the comment in the notebook was Luke saying, when he found Jodi that night, he saw a red scrunchie in her hair (something he couldn't have seen from where he was standing - the inference being he was much closer to Jodi than he claimed). The fact is, we don't know what the reference in the note book to a "red scrunchie" was about. This was also weeks after the post mortem, when the pathologist reported finding a scrunchie tangled in Jodi's hair - there's every possibility that this information was passed to Luke by police officers inadvertently. (Reporter statement, possibly transcript, interrogation transcript available.)

Stabbing Jodi in the leg
Reported by only one witness. I don't remember if it was used in court - I'll check the transcripts. (If used, transcript available).

Burning something in the garden
"maybe something like gloves?" Never been suggested by anyone, no evidence whatsoever to support it. Interesting, though, that Ferris appeared to be trying to hide, or explain away, a pair of wet, muddy gloves found in Yvonne Walker's flat. There are two sets of statements, one referring to these gloves being "down the back of a radiator" another that they were "in a drawer under the bed." One interpretation could be that they were originally behind the radiator, but were moved to the drawer before being handed to police. (Statements available).

Bulging from his pocket
This reference followed on from the suggestion that gloves might have been burned in Luke's garden - that the gloves might have been what were "bulging" from "his" pocket (ref the Bryson sighting). There's a bit of a problem there - Andrina Bryson described a "fishing style jacket with the collar up" and matching fishing style trousers. The bottom of the jacket was straight (no "tail" like a parka) and stopped just below the waist. In other words, it was not a parka jacket she was describing and the parka owned by Luke after the murder (from memory) had a hood (not a collar) and had no pocket on the upper left sleeve. (Statements and photographs available). The likelihood of the witness noticing the left sleeve, in particular, is undermined by police reconstruction photographs (available).

I also have copies of Shane's original statements and the phone data regarding the speaking clock, which shows Luke called the speaking clock numerous times in the period covered by the data (leading up to the murder) within roughly similar timescales - in the morning, before he would leave for school and in the afternoon, between getting in from school and his mother arriving home for dinner around 5.15pm.

[gordo30]

I wonder how we can define anything regarding being found guilty in a courtroom, shock must have played a massive part. I remember myself being shunted from feeling he was guilty to think my god he’s going to get off with this, imagine what he must have been thinking. His life was over and he had to spend most of it as a child murderer. These guys don’t get much leeway in jail but I believe since he has become a bit of an enigma to himself in that manner.
What do we do when faced with that kind of hardship! Fight like mad to try and free himself and fight for any scrap that could prove so. Once time and time again this falls on deaf hears maybe just maybe you become who everyone says you are. They want to hear the satanic ramblings, the weird doodles on paintings or other scribbling. I think many times like gave up but it’s something in his personality that seems to drive him to keep carrying on.