Re: The murder of Jodi Jones

[Bullseye]

Does anyone know if Luke’s family have taken part, would like to hear what his brother has to say. There has been some debate as to whether he supports Luke or not. For me he holds the key to where luke was that day. I think it’s been said that he didn’t get a fair chance at court to say what happened that day, if that is the case now is his chance to put his side across exactly as he wants, in order to help Luke.

His brother is the key witness and if the investigators have not interviewed him then IMO it’s a huge mistake. Fingers crossed they have.

[Steve_uk]

It looks as if the documentary will be a sympathetic portrayal of the accused: https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-news/6704329/luke-mitchell-jodi-jones-killer-channel-5-documentary/

[WakeyWakey]

It looks as if the documentary will be a sympathetic portrayal of the accused:

yes, lacking the obvios hard hitting questions and key witnesses as most attempts to look into this case.

weshall see but id be surprised to see any balance

[lookout]

Framed---lack of evidence, etc. etc. along with the usual weird character syndrome which doesn't mean a thing. Another MOJ in the making.

[Harper]

Nobody's asking you to watch it Davie2.

Better be careful about accusing people of "telling fibs again," especially when you have zero facts at your disposal.

There’s no way someone who spends so much time contributing to this forum isn’t going to watch it!

[Harper]

I certainly won't be watching it as it airs. But will probably catch up on it at some point. But going by some rags reporting on it, It is looking like the same old. Just another 2, in a long line of people that have scratched & clawed their way though the case papers to tell us all that Luke was a harmless wee lad, that was the victim of a fit-up, that the witnesses are all lier's & Luke was really in the house burning pie, while his brother was playing with himself. My curiosity of this documentary, is who these 2 are going to blame. Is it just going to be the same people or are they going to come up with something new? My bets are on Robert Greens getting a medal.

Fair enough Davie. I'll be very surprised if they try to claim Robert Greens is the culprit! I think it would be very interesting to hear from the key people after all this time. Shane Mitchell, Stephen Kelly, Andrina Bryson and even Luke's pals that saw him that evening. Have any of them changed their opinion over the years?

[lookout]

Do you have any evidence at all of a police framing? 

I don't believe any of Luke's DNA was found ? Others, yes apart from one which had been verified but it didn't belong to Luke. Would you not have thought that Luke's DNA would have been found if he'd murdered her ?

[WakeyWakey]

I don't believe any of Luke's DNA was found ? Others, yes apart from one which had been verified but it didn't belong to Luke. Would you not have thought that Luke's DNA would have been found if he'd murdered her ?

"Jodi's DNA was found on the accussed's trousers but this could have occurred through an "innocent transfer".

"Ms Ure said a stain on a bra Jodi had been wearing showed DNA traces from more than two individuals - some of which matched parts of Luke Mitchell's genetic profile.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/4098795.stm

"Donald Findlay QC, defending Luke Mitchell, suggested to Ms Ure that DNA could be found in a completely "sinister place but have a wholly innocent explanation" to which she agreed.

Mr Findlay said the court had heard in some detail of Jodi and Luke's relationship and added: "Boyfriend, girlfriend, being intimate with each other.


prosecution and defence both agreed to not utilize dna relating to mitchell on jodi as what would it prove? theyd spent time together earlier that day, they were bf and gf, you'd expect his dna to be there regardless, itd be endless back and forth for nothing

[David1819]

He also told these friends that Jodi wouldn't be coming out as she was grounded, despite AO telling him on the phone she had already left and was on her way to meet him.

Not sure why he told his friends Jodi was grounded while also telling his mum to direct her to their whereabouts when she turns up at his door. She could have turned up at any minute. Why was he telling people she was grounded? He knew she wasn't home, he was told she already left, and apparently thought she might turn up at his door.

He apparently waited an hour for her before suddenly deciding he didn't care.


None of it makes sense.

Then he had a fire in his back garden later that night  with no explanation to date of what they were burning. The same day he wore that green jacket that was never recovered but replaced later on.

[Harper]

It would be great to hear from those publicly, balance is always good when it comes to documentaries. But like the James English podcasts, there was absolutely no balance whatsoever & that is where I have an issue. As far as the people you mention are concerned, it is done it was over years ago for them, publicly you will not hear from them. Why on earth would they? Why do they need that crap & stress in their lives years later? Justice was done. To satisfy the needs of a few conspiracy theorists & online trolls. These documentaries are just money spinners.

I've never thought of myself as a conspiracy theorist or an online troll!
I agree that the individuals involved would likely want nothing to do with it, unless they had changed their opinions, or felt that they have been misinterpreted by the media.
Considering that this case was one of the longest and most expensive trials in Scottish criminal history, they did a terrible job gathering any evidence that was more than just circumstantial, which is why the same arguments have been had dozens of times on this forum (and will do again after this week). Surely the answers can be found through DNA from the crime scene?

[nugnug]

It would be great to hear from those publicly, balance is always good when it comes to documentaries. But like the James English podcasts, there was absolutely no balance whatsoever & that is where I have an issue. As far as the people you mention are concerned, it is done it was over years ago for them, publicly you will not hear from them. Why on earth would they? Why do they need that crap & stress in their lives years later? Justice was done. To satisfy the needs of a few conspiracy theorists & online trolls. These documentaries are just money spinners.

screming troll aand conspriacy theorist doesnt make people go away you know it wont make them shut up it has abslutly no effect whatsoever.

its not magic word.

[guest7363]

It looks as if the documentary will be a sympathetic portrayal of the accused: https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/scottish-news/6704329/luke-mitchell-jodi-jones-killer-channel-5-documentary/

Its getting some publicity it’s just been advertised on Channel 5 Murder in a small Town

[Bullseye]

Its getting some publicity it’s just been advertised on Channel 5 Murder in a small Town

I think they are showing the lie detector tests luke and his mum took and passed. I read you can fool a lie detector but it’s harder to fool the person in charge of the test so looked up to see what the person said about it, interestingly he said - “I will say without a doubt that Luke Mitchell did not stab Jodi. End of”

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16881798.luke-mitchell-interview-terry-mullins-polygraph-expert/

[guest7363]

I think they are showing the lie detector tests luke and his mum took and passed. I read you can fool a lie detector but it’s harder to fool the person in charge of the test so looked up to see what the person said about it, interestingly he said - “I will say without a doubt that Luke Mitchell did not stab Jodi. End of”

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/16881798.luke-mitchell-interview-terry-mullins-polygraph-expert/

I watched the Chris Watts lie detector test, the woman who did it was amazing, he scored -18 which is very high, they say -4 is the usual indicator your lying.  My opinion,  I think on balance it depends how quick after the event you take the test that determine’s the result?

[Bullseye]

I watched the Chris Watts lie detector test, the woman who did it was amazing, he scored -18 which is very high, they say -4 is the usual indicator your lying.  My opinion,  I think on balance it depends how quick after the event you take the test that determine’s the result?

I’ve wondered the same, if after years you keep telling the same story over and over then would it not be easier to pass a test, in a way you believe the lie? Just thought it was interesting the tester was sure Luke didn’t do it.