Author Topic: Re: The murder of Jodi Jones  (Read 196955 times)

0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1695 on: October 06, 2019, 10:07:PM »
OK, I'm off now - this "unemployed (whatever I was called) who hasn't worked for years" has to be up early for work tomorrow.

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: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1696 on: October 06, 2019, 10:37:PM »
Take nugs with you. Give him one of your tramadols, knock him clean out.

your not foing yourelf any favours you know.

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: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1697 on: October 07, 2019, 07:46:AM »
Post under your own name. Coward.

i know desprate to shout down all debate about this case but its not going to happen.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1698 on: October 07, 2019, 10:39:AM »
This is most shocking abuse ! I'm appalled, though not surprised at this cowardly act. Shame on you.

Offline ngb1066

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6600
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1699 on: October 07, 2019, 10:39:AM »
I have removed two posts.  It is totally unacceptable to post a photograph of another member, particularly where it is clearly done in order to intimidate.  We are getting very close to bans being imposed.  I do not want to do that but I will have no choice if this type of behaviour continues.

Offline marty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 463
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1700 on: October 07, 2019, 10:48:AM »
He went to her door. There was no threat of violence.
Aye, right then. Blatant lie

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1701 on: October 07, 2019, 12:26:PM »

Quote
They weren't told to stay away from the grave, they were told not to attend the funeral earlier that day. Different thing

Agree - this however interests me on different levels.
We have noted before the reasons behind why Luke, friend and mother chose to visit this girls grave,
on the day of her funeral.
It's in black and white - not to attend the funeral.
To show respect? He did not attend, not really of choice though,
would he have gotten anywhere near?

On one hand we have from Nug that this was but a teenage boy,
so what, his girlfriend didn't bother to show up that evening.
That they were just kids "for Christ sake". Not like they were married or owt.
They had barely known each other personally for three months.
He would see her at school the next day.

This girl is brutally murdered.
Some 9 weeks later her funeral takes place.

And everything has changed.
It appears clear at this stage - that this girls family, believed Luke to be responsible,
for this girls death.
He is asked to not attend the funeral.

They first of all do what some may do in these circumstances: (If innocent)
They choose to hold their own little vigil - a lovely little service at home.
This in itself may appear just a little OTT for some.
After all, this boy had barely known this girl.
He was just a wee laddie after all.
They take this a step further, they invite the media ( the hated media)
into their home - to film this private ceremony.
They do this at the same time of the funeral.
They know the media are going to be present there.
This is a high profile story -
Do we already see here, that Luke wants to be a part of this attention.
That he is perhaps, sticking the middle finger up to the Jones',
and to all and everyone else.
He does not like being told what to do - he is backing down to no-one.
He is most definitely not going to stay back.
It is not enough that they have this little service,
that they invite the hated media into film it.
So heavily medicated of course - that no emotion was shown, in this service.
More needs to be done - he is not staying back from all of this attention,
he is going to this grave also - within hours of this burial.
He knows the media will be present, watching from his house,
to see what he may do next.
He is not to be thwarted by this.
After all, it is his right - to do as he pleases.
It is his right, to show these OTT reactions towards someone,
and their family whom he barely knew.
This of course all done, with the personal sense and guidance of
a mother, who did not try to stop her son.
From showing this disrespect, not just to this girls family,
but to this girl herself.

Of course, none of us know what we may choose to do - we haven't walked in those shoes.
Would we however, as parents allow this clear show of disrespect to this girl.
It matters not at this point of innocence or not.
What matters are the wishes of this girls family for their daughter/loved one.
That the person, they clearly believed responsible should stay clear.
Not just from the funeral - but in general.
He had absolutely no rights, to be there at any time.
He was told NO - that was not allowed.
It clearly had nothing to do with respectful wishes.
He clearly showed no respect, for any type of authority.
Clearly shown in his interviews with the police,
with his mother.
This wee smite - that he clearly was not.

Nothing however was going to stop this laddie - he set the rules with his mother.
Something that was clearly shown - time and time again.

He was allowed to smoke.
He was allowed to get a tattoo.
He was allowed to carry knives.
He was allowed to drink.
He was allowed drive.
He was allowed to go around manky.
Strangely clean that evening though, when met with his friends.
He was allowed large sums of money.
He was allowed to have underage sex at home.
He was allowed to use cannabis at a young age.
He was by all account - allowed to do as he pleased.
He did not do anything wrong - It was clearly everyone else?
He had no rules set for him, bar, strangely enough,
having to make dinner of a Monday night, for all the family.
Which from the off was clearly wrong;
His mother cooked her own - vegetarian food of prawns.

Yet again, when challenged we are met with a singular hint of authority from his
mother.
That of this girl begging her mother not to tell Corrine something,
as Luke would get into trouble.
Would he though?

And of course, this will be met with;
He had every right to pay his definition of respect, publicly for this girl.
After all, he was so deeply in love with her, at 14,
that he had another girl, ready to meet in Kenmore the following week.
that there was no care of thought shown, in his ludicrous claims of,
waiting around Newbattle Road for nearly 90mins - without checking/
walking - going anywhere near this path.
That there is no oddity in not trying to locate her all evening.
No oddity in that she did not contact him all evening.
No oddity in his lack of concern in any shape or form -
yet, it was just and correct for him to go completely OTT again,
with all of his actions on the day of this girls funeral.

Messy:

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1702 on: October 07, 2019, 12:47:PM »
Quote
The problem with bullies and cowards is that they usually try to ensure there are no witnesses.

There is a police record of Joseph Jones being given a warning after he turned up on my doorstep threatening me. I have a copy of an email from someone calling himself "John Jones" telling me to "do everyone a favour, next time you're out, throw yourself under a bus" and making references to the same thing "happening to your daughters".

The incidents of being spat on, pushed off the pavement onto the road, threatened in Tescos car park were not witnessed by anyone I know, although all took place in public places.

The incident of being threatened in a local pub was witnessed by 5 other people I do know.

The incident where sunflowers were hung at the end of my street to highlight where I live was admitted to, online, by Judith Jones herself.

I've had private messages on forums threatening to publish my home address, phone number, pictures of my home and my daughters online. I have archives of these and no, I'm not going to spend hours digging them out to satisfy those who choose to believe I've never been threatened.

Even as recently as the James English interviews, there were comments warning me that I'd "better be careful."

It's easy (not to mention utterly cowardly) to threaten someone who lives alone - Joseph Jones' mistake in coming to my door that day was in thinking there would be no witnesses. He was wrong on three counts.

For those who think I've made these claims in order to appear as a victim - not a chance. I've carried on doing what I do in spite of the threats for over 16 years. And, as I've said so many times before, I will not back down to bullies. OK?

This is all rather alarming - yes in the actions of people who threaten, but more so in this post at present.
It makes no sense at all.


It starts off with the bullies and cowards whom usually try to ensure there are no witnesses,
yet, of all of the examples given, none are of hidden acts, out of the public eye.
All public in some way - whether in person or online.
Some, obviously not hidden at all. in that they are known or indeed give their name.

Not that I am of course suggesting that, actions (some) of this sort are not, somewhat cowardly.

I could go down some silly little lines of reasoning -
Someone who is spearheading a campaign to get a convicted killer back on the streets.
is in turn getting retaliation.

What does alarm me is the choice of wording. It's oddity.

Why would Judith Jones putting sunflowers at the end of Ms Leans street, be done for the purpose,
to highlight where Ms Lean stayed?
Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever?
Surely, if knowing where Ms Lean stayed, that Judith's intention was to highlight this to others
she would simply put it out in the public domain?
Did these sunflowers have arrows on them, a note attached with Ms Leans address?
How therefore is this deemed as some threatening, hidden, cowardly act?
Messy.

Then of course we have this John Jones. There has of course got to be a connection.
Does not matter the coincidence of the name being the same, being one of the most common
names around.
This had been done by email - this is proof, something would have been able to be done.
Traced to source and so forth.
Not therefore taking seriously by Ms Lean.
Perhaps one of those occasions/empty threats that gave Ms Lean a warm glow. (twitter)

Perhaps the biggest oddity in all of this, is the account of Joseph's visit to Ms Leans door.

Quote
It's easy (not to mention utterly cowardly) to threaten someone who lives alone - Joseph Jones' mistake in coming to my door that day was in thinking there would be no witnesses. He was wrong on three counts.

This is a prime example of taken a fraction of truth - and adding a whole lot of assumption.
Something that becomes clearer, as a trademark across the board.
An area of truth that is exaggerated to the extreme if pushing a point against.
An area of truth that is downplayed in exaggeration, to the extreme when making a point for.
Like that of the half Mars bar, of missing the V, of the noise from the duos bike.

In this scenario we have a visit to Ms Leans door.
What is clear, is that this guy is drunk, upset and angry.
The most rationale thing to do here, is of course to try and talk to this guy.
To invite, to show him the DNA results from the evidence.
No, of course it's not.
The rationale thing to do here, is to close the door and call the police if need be.
Ms Lean does not though - she does not need to.
Behind her door is a man, not really there for protection, or if he is,
there is nothing from this male, that causes enough concern to step out.
What happens instead, is Ms Lean tries to keep things up with Joseph.
She knows all is being witnessed, she is certainly not intimidated.
Entrapment?

That aside - what also strikes me above is the additives.
Again, taking this incident of truth to the extreme.
The visit to her door.
Then the arms and legs are added on for good measure.
A coward, coming to the door of someone who lives ALONE.
Of the mistake this guy made in thinking there would be NO witnesses.
I have known for many years that Ms Lean has two daughters.
I don't know what year this incident happened, yet the assumption
is put forward, that not only would Joseph know Ms Leans daughters
were not there, that Joseph would know there was no Mr Lean, or boyfriend.
Does Ms Lean live in the middle of nowhere or in a built up area?
Presuming here, because he was drunk, this is not too far from where he stayed.
So a built up area, would be a fair guess?
Why therefore, would she assume, that Joseph would assume there would be
witnesses? or that she would be home alone?
Or in this drunken state, care or have any conscious thought of witnesses
Certainly makes it sound better though.

When all that can be really clear, is that this guy was drunk, he was upset,
he was angry. He arrives at Ms Leans door and lets loose with the verbals.
Shocking behaviour, not to be condoned.
Why the need for the additives.
Compulsive it would seem as certainly not singular, in taken small areas of fact,
and building them up with assumptions.




Rather like the Mars bar - it wasn't a missile as such, doesn't matter the attack,
it was only a wee half  Mars bar.
The duo one month have gotten quickly to this V point by 5.15pm, from
basically tool hire at 5pm as the bike was working on the first half of this path.
Recently when faced with the noise from this bike - of Luke hearing it approach.
This changed to them pushing for the first half of this path, with no noise.

Messy

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: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1703 on: October 07, 2019, 03:40:PM »
Common sense prevailing again with Davie and Parky's posts.

Joseph Jones turned up at your door so out of control and threatening, that he simply walked away after blowing off steam. This the same individual Sandra thinks might have murdered his own teenage sister for stealing a lump of hash off him. 

Ok then.

Spot on from Parky again, textbook Sandra sensationalism. What proof do you have Joey  thought you were alone or he wouldn't have come? None at all. Nothing to suggest it, but it just sounds better, doesn't it? It paints a certain picture of him you want to create, but the true story doesn't quite have the same effect.

well there is the little problem that he admited to doing it.

the threat i mean.
« Last Edit: October 07, 2019, 03:49:PM by nugnug »

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1704 on: October 07, 2019, 03:50:PM »
Quote
When all that can be really clear, is that this guy was drunk, he was upset,he was angry. He arrives at Ms Leans door and lets loose with the verbals. Shocking behaviour, not to be condoned.

Drunk? When have I ever said, or even suggested, that the guy was drunk? To my knowledge, he wasn't.

So, you guys all think it's acceptable for an angry male (drunk or otherwise) to appear at the door of a female single parent and "let loose with the verbals" (which included direct threats)?

The re-writing of that incident here is incredible (and I mean that literally - as in , not credible) - there were witnesses, CCTV footage, police statements and the warning letter. He didn't get it for nothing, did he?

It actually makes me quite sad that, in order to push their own agenda, posters on this forum are happy to pass all of that off as (a) totally acceptable and (b) somehow my fault. Not for me - I don't care what they think -  but for any other female who should find herself on the receiving end of such behaviour.

So, I'll ask Parky, Lithium, and Davie, in particular, if someone had behaved like that towards your mother, sister, partner or daughter, would you be using the same arguments to excuse that behaviour? I think not.

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: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1705 on: October 07, 2019, 03:51:PM »
Thankfully I'm away offshore for 2 weeks tomorrow & the wifi is junk on that rig, so my in-coming ban might be delayed, didums for Nugs.

I'm also going to call BS that those incidents ever happened. No-body was charged for what seems to be serious intimidation & threatening behaviour, that had witness, so we are lead to believe. Personally i would have done a lot more, then turn up to someone house drunk to say a few words, when you consider some things that were getting thrown out there. The Jones have showed massive restrained over the years, and they deserve a lot of credit for that. And they deserve the right to get on with their lives, without this constant BS that keeps getting brought up. Lean must have thought all her Christmas's had come at once, When she got that phone call from James English, the forums had gone cold, the support was dwindling, the appeals turned down, the money had gone, their forum was gone, the smart ones among them were seeing right though the BS John/Steph etc. But in 2019 they got a new lease of life, a new audience, so it starts again, the sensationalism, the misinformation, the promise of new websites, the promise of new uploads, the chance to make some more money. I'm curious to know if any of those who watched the podcasts on You Tube are here? Those who never knew anything about the case before the podcasts? Or is it just the same old? reappearing? 

So what is the end game? Luke is going no-where, they have nothing that proves he is not the killer, i would not even put them in the bracket of being amateurs. No-body with any credibly want to touch this case with a bargepole, you have to ask why? that lot in Glasgow that deals with MOJ, they took one look at the case papers & chucked it in the bin, only for CM to very publicly rifle though the bin to retrieve the muddled up papers, to deliver them back to Lean or are they really just shoved back in CM's cupboard?

so if a court report of him being charged and pleading guilty turned up what would you say
« Last Edit: October 07, 2019, 03:58:PM by nugnug »

Offline sandra L

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 975
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1706 on: October 07, 2019, 03:57:PM »
Quote
Personally i would have done a lot more, then turn up to someone house drunk to say a few words, when you consider some things that were getting thrown out there.

I'm just going to leave that right there - it's a quote from "Davie." That is the level some of those who disagree with me are prepared to stoop to.

Offline lookout

  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 48661
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1707 on: October 07, 2019, 04:05:PM »
Didn't Luke Mitchell once say he'd rather die in prison than admit to doing something he hadn't done ?

Back in 1986 a Michael Shirley had said the same thing after having been accused of murdering Linda Cook.
Shirley, after serving a minimum sentence of 15 years he would have been released had he admitted guilt, but he refused, saying that he'd have been prepared to have stayed put to prove his innocence. His sentence was quashed in 2003 by the CoA as a result of exculpatory DNA evidence.

Is there any information regarding DNA evidence from Luke Mitchell ?

Strange that if you admit to a murder your release is fast-tracked yet if there's no admission you're kept locked up ad infinitum like Jeremy Bamber where the " excuse " of being in denial is used  ::)As if !!

Offline marty

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 463
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1708 on: October 07, 2019, 04:07:PM »
Common sense prevailing again with Davie and Parky's posts.

Joseph Jones turned up at your door so out of control and threatening, that he simply walked away after blowing off steam. This the same individual Sandra thinks might have murdered his own teenage sister for stealing a lump of hash off him. 

Ok then.

Spot on from Parky again, textbook Sandra sensationalism. What proof do you have Joey  thought you were alone or he wouldn't have come? None at all. Nothing to suggest it, but it just sounds better, doesn't it? It paints a certain picture of him you want to create, but the true story doesn't quite have the same effect.
Sensationalism.... the guys a fruit loop

Offline Parky41

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 271
Re: The murder of Jodi Jones
« Reply #1709 on: October 07, 2019, 04:27:PM »
Quote
Drunk? When have I ever said, or even suggested, that the guy was drunk? To my knowledge, he wasn't.

So, you guys all think it's acceptable for an angry male (drunk or otherwise) to appear at the door of a female single parent and "let loose with the verbals" (which included direct threats)?

The re-writing of that incident here is incredible (and I mean that literally - as in , not credible) - there were witnesses, CCTV footage, police statements and the warning letter. He didn't get it for nothing, did he?

It actually makes me quite sad that, in order to push their own agenda, posters on this forum are happy to pass all of that off as (a) totally acceptable and (b) somehow my fault. Not for me - I don't care what they think -  but for any other female who should find herself on the receiving end of such behaviour.

So, I'll ask Parky, Lithium, and Davie, in particular, if someone had behaved like that towards your mother, sister, partner or daughter, would you be using the same arguments to excuse that behaviour? I think not.



Quote
Not that I am of course suggesting that, actions (some) of this sort are not, somewhat cowardly.

I could go down some silly little lines of reasoning -
Someone who is spearheading a campaign to get a convicted killer back on the streets.
is in turn getting retaliation.

This is all rather alarming - yes in the actions of people who threaten

But I didn't and I wouldn't.
My post was clear in two parts - that I would not condone this type of behaviour.
There was no part in my post excusing this type of behaviour.
My post was clear - it was of the assumptions that you had added.

If you are clearly stating that I have made an assumption on this guy being drunk.
To distract from the meaning of my post, fair enough.
It has been mentioned many times - that this guy was drunk.