Luke Mitchell

[Hattie]

Well, a case a lot, well maybe not, know about. The circumstances behind this conviction and subsequent ignorance of actual dna of substances at site of killing is only a small part of this.
For such a lack of forensic, well i say a lack, i mean zero!! Evidence. Yet DNA and subsequent evidence deemed not worthy is mental. S massacre of a young girl and not a single bit of dna? How is that possible? Did he wash in acid? Statements changed from the day from 3 people to exactly the same changes of statements from the time? Very likely suspects, esp with resulting injuries you’d expect ignored... the list goes on.. mental.
Id be amazed if anyone thought different! I have never ever trusted the cops due to personal shit that they lied about with me.
Are they covering for a beast that is a police informer? Fuck knows, but this stinks

 

[SuperTortolano]

Definitely suspect. I watched a documentary years ago and thought something didn't add up. Might need to revisit that one

 

[Hammi]

Even if he did do it. He shouldn't have been found guilty.
Not proven in any way, shape or form.

I was too young at the time to pay any actual attention, but my mums always thought he didn't do it.
Interesting that there's another suspect that they can't name but are pretty convinced the evidence stacked against him.

I think he might well be innocent...

 

[Purple & Green]

Was there anything new in the second part? Didn't see anything new in the first part - the guy talking about Mark Kane is still milking it - he previously tried to sell "his" story for 50k. I thought the programme was pretty exploitative of his mum, she's a pitiful soul and it just seemed like padding giving her airtime.

I wonder if he will ever be released given that he's never accepted responsibility for the crime.

 

[Westside Green]

Was there anything new in the second part? Didn't see anything new in the first part - the guy talking about Mark Kane is still milking it - he previously tried to sell "his" story for 50k. I thought the programme was pretty exploitative of his mum, she's a pitiful soul and it just seemed like padding giving her airtime.

I wonder if he will ever be released given that he's never accepted responsibility for the crime.

Hard to think what you'd do if your were the victim of a wrongful conviction. Express remorse to get parole or keep fighting it?
I'm probably stubborn enough to do 50 year

 

[le Deej]

Well, a case a lot, well maybe not, know about. The circumstances behind this conviction and subsequent ignorance of actual dna of substances at site of killing is only a small part of this.
For such a lack of forensic, well i say a lack, i mean zero!! Evidence. Yet DNA and subsequent evidence deemed not worthy is mental. S massacre of a young girl and not a single bit of dna? How is that possible? Did he wash in acid? Statements changed from the day from 3 people to exactly the same changes of statements from the time? Very likely suspects, esp with resulting injuries you’d expect ignored... the list goes on.. mental.
Id be amazed if anyone thought different! I have never ever trusted the cops due to personal shit that they lied about with me.
Are they covering for a beast that is a police informer? Fuck knows, but this stinks

As far as I understand it, there was a dna match. It belonged to the boyfriend of Jodie's sister. Apparently the dna from his sperm ended up on Jodie's bra because Jodie had borrowed a t-shirt and it had somehow transferred.
It seems the polis decided it was Mitchell from the start, so fitted him up.

 

[le Deej]

Definitely suspect. I watched a documentary years ago and thought something didn't add up. Might need to revisit that one

A book called Innocents Betrayed by Dr Sandra Lean is well worth reading. Amazon price is a bit steep, it's cheaper if you shop about a bit.

Innocents Betrayed: A true story of justice abandoned: Amazon.co.uk: Lean, Sandra: 9781999617103: Books

Buy Innocents Betrayed: A true story of justice abandoned Illustrated by Lean, Sandra (ISBN: 9781999617103) from Amazon's Book Store. Everyday low prices and free delivery on eligible orders.

www.amazon.co.uk

 

[Hibee Kev]

Was there anything new in the second part? Didn't see anything new in the first part - the guy talking about Mark Kane is still milking it - he previously tried to sell "his" story for 50k. I thought the programme was pretty exploitative of his mum, she's a pitiful soul and it just seemed like padding giving her airtime.

I wonder if he will ever be released given that he's never accepted responsibility for the crime.

The second episode concluded with the 2 cops that had re-examined the case deciding Luke was innocent and they had uncovered a new prime suspect who they couldn’t name. Not sure if this mystery character has been mentioned before or not.

 

[DarrenSQH]

The show picked and choose the evidence they wanted to talk about. No mention that his brother testified that luke Mitchell was lying about his alibi and whereabouts.

He also had carved "JJ 1989-2003" into his knife holder. Strange stuff for an innocent person to do whos the main suspect.

Felt bad for Jodis family having they 2 ex police clowns lie in the spot the body was found and pretend to slice up the body like it was. The shows so called experts were extremely bias.

 

[hibbybilly]

The second episode concluded with the 2 cops that had re-examined the case deciding Luke was innocent and they had uncovered a new prime suspect who they couldn’t name. Not sure if this mystery character has been mentioned before or not.

Da Vinci is a clue tae this mystery character Kev.

 

[tayside hibee]

It was very thought provoking, but also very biased.
The jury found him guilty in 1day which is very quick considering the length of the trial and evidence.
3 appeals have been rejected, that is 9 of the finest legal brains in the country deciding he was guilty. Is the legal system in this country really that corrupt ? Surely not, maybe I'm mega naive.
As for the 2 former detectives, I thought they were comical, they had convinced themselves it was almost definitely erm , him, him him or them. One of them said in 20+ years of policing , my gut instinct has never been wrong.
Aye, ok pal.

 

[Hibee Kev]

Da Vinci is a clue tae this mystery character Kev.

Aye the Missus has done some cyber-sleuthing this morning and identified said character!

 

[hibbybilly]

Aye the Missus has done some cyber-sleuthing this morning and identified said character!

Julie telt me

 

[Doc Shrink]

Is it the fella er........ R.G.?

I'm assuming we cannae name names........

 

[Westside Green]

It was very thought provoking, but also very biased.
The jury found him guilty in 1day which is very quick considering the length of the trial and evidence.
3 appeals have been rejected, that is 9 of the finest legal brains in the country deciding he was guilty. Is the legal system in this country really that corrupt ? Surely not, maybe I'm mega naive.
As for the 2 former detectives, I thought they were comical, they had convinced themselves it was almost definitely erm , him, him him or them. One of them said in 20+ years of policing , my gut instinct has never been wrong.
Aye, ok pal.

How can any police officer come out with such a ridiculous statement. Maybe there's 20+ years of unsafe convictions that need looked at.
Watched the Jeremy Bamber programme a few weeks ago and it seems they'd not changed much in 20 years.

 

[EA2007]

Don’t worry when there’s been news reports for so long about the same thing. Was there not chat that the last suspect on the program was her own brother??

 

[Braehead Cabbage]

In no way,shape or form can it be considered a safe conviction.
Zero forensic evidence against Mitchell but sperms samples from someone else on Jodis clothes and fresh sperm in a condom beside the body.
Main prosecution witness couldn't identify Mitchell in court and her cousin and his moped pal claimed not to remember anything about the day of the murder.
Is he guilty?Dunno but he definitely didn't get a fair trial,the length of time between the murder and his arrest shows how little evidence the police had and his demonisation at the hands of the media,rembering he was still technically a child,was scandalous.

 

[Hattie]

In no way,shape or form can it be considered a safe conviction.
Zero forensic evidence against Mitchell but sperms samples from someone else on Jodis clothes and fresh sperm in a condom beside the body.
Main prosecution witness couldn't identify Mitchell in court and her cousin and his moped pal claimed not to remember anything about the day of the murder.
Is he guilty?Dunno but he definitely didn't get a fair trial,the length of time between the murder and his arrest shows how little evidence the police had and his demonisation at the hands of the media,rembering he was still technically a child,was scandalous.

Witness statements changed in court.... it was a farce, actual zero evidence.. all the manson stuff fabricated by the press. Disregarding sperm on sisters boyfriends top AND a freshly used condom?? Moped seen at the scene of crime at the precise time. The person who said they saw luke at the roadside couldn’t pick him out in court, the same person who was driving round a bend on a narrow road when she said she saw him When you have QC’s and Forensic experts in disbelief at the total lack of incriminating evidence in what was basically a massacre of a girl beggars belief. That kind of murder and no blood, cuts, scratches and he had dirt under his finger nails as clearly had not even washed his hands, never mind scrubbing himself clean of blood! Thats just ludicrous

 

[Hattie]

Our corrupt police force. Raphael Rowe - Wikipedia

 

[Forzahibs]

Our corrupt police force. Raphael Rowe - Wikipedia

To be fair the police didn't find him guilty , the jury did

 

[Hattie]

To be fair the police didn't find him guilty , the jury did

Yeah fair point, but the police ignored do much as from the off they had him as THE suspect right away, even without a scrap of evidence, hence the reason they ignored some remarkable evidence of others being there.
And it was a huge trial by media, nit a chance of a fair trial

 

[Forzahibs]

Yeah fair point, but the police ignored do much as from the off they had him as THE suspect right away, even without a scrap of evidence, hence the reason they ignored some remarkable evidence of others being there.
And it was a huge trial by media, nit a chance of a fair trial

I only caught some of last nights one , they said the only evidence they had was circumstantial and no blood etc on Luke Mitchell which was to say the least a bit surprising . Amazing though that his appeals haven't helped him in that case , hard to know what to make of it

 

[Hattie]

I only caught some of last nights one , they said the only evidence they had was circumstantial and no blood etc on Luke Mitchell which was to say the least a bit surprising . Amazing though that his appeals haven't helped him in that case , hard to know what to make of it

Yeah, for the crazy satanic style slaughter there was no DNA whatsoever or evidence at all putting him there

 

[Westside Green]

Yeah, for the crazy satanic style slaughter there was no DNA whatsoever or evidence at all putting him there

If you're not doing much you can read the transcripts of his appeals.

LUKE MITCHELL v. HER MAJESTY'S ADVOCATE

The gist of it seems to be lots of circumstantial evidence combining to prove his guilt in the minds of the jury.

 

[Doc Shrink]

The boy had a hoop in his lip.
And a fcukin PONYTAIL!!!





Guilty as fuck.

 

[emerald green]

Whats the chances of any of you wi partners having NONE of your DNA on them? Not a bit?

The lack of DNA meant they couldnae nail him on DNA. So he was nailed on somethin else, by a jury, in 1 day, and by 3 subsequent appeals.

Nae winners here. Sad stuff. RIP tae the wee lassie.

 

[Braehead Cabbage]

Is it the fella er...... R.G.?

I'm assuming we cannae name names......

As far as I'm aware the unnamed person had a history of violence,drug use and mental issue,initials the same as the poor lassie murdered.
It's even been suggested the search party was looking for him and not Jodi

 

[bigmanandy]

Second episode pulled over legal blunder

 

[Purple & Green]

funny was looking for it last night.

I think that tells you all you need to know about the standard of the program

 

[Purple & Green]

“Truth will always be truth, regardless of lack of understanding, belief or ignorance.”

Judy Jones

 

[emerald green]

Mitchell and his family specifically told police at the time that he did not want legal representation at the time of the witness staements.

The special defence lodge by Donald Findlay was that he was cooking in the kitchen with him mum at the time.... only when it came to the trial, mitchells brother, under cross examination stated that his mum and brother were not in the house at the time..... because he was upstairs watching internet porn.. and under oath he stated that there is no way he would have watched this had any of his family been in the house at the time. So donald Findlay QC, took all the evidence at hand, and without going hammer and tong at eg circumstanial evidence, he homed in on the special alibi, which then got turned on its head by a member of the accused family! Findlay is nae mug. If there was a way for him to get off with it, Findlay would have found it!

Mitchell loves his blades..... 2 big blades were missing from his set. He etched her initials and birth year and death year into the sheath of one his knives...nice touch..With his dog, he LED the search party right to the body. Neighbours complained to police about his mother burning thngs in the back garden, and the horrible smell therefof, on the day of the murder. (coz aye, one of the first things an innocent person does is burn clothes!).

...and the 3 high judges who independently reviewed the case, at different times, all stated the prosecution was sound (albeit one of them was critical of some aspects of the police investigation).

Every single thing in the programme, is known to the defence team, family, and is in the public domain. Nothing new came out of that programme. Some people trying to make a name for themselves. Everybody loves a conspiracy...

theres mair, but i cant be arsed.

 

[hibbybilly]

Mitchell and his family specifically told police at the time that he did not want legal representation at the time of the witness staements.

The special defence lodge by Donald Findlay was that he was cooking in the kitchen with him mum at the time.... only when it came to the trial, mitchells brother, under cross examination stated that his mum and brother were not in the house at the time..... because he was upstairs watching internet porn.. and under oath he stated that there is no way he would have watched this had any of his family been in the house at the time. So donald Findlay QC, took all the evidence at hand, and without going hammer and tong at eg circumstanial evidence, he homed in on the special alibi, which then got turned on its head by a member of the accused family! Findlay is nae mug. If there was a way for him to get off with it, Findlay would have found it!

Mitchell loves his blades..... 2 big blades were missing from his set. He etched her initials and birth year and death year into the sheath of one his knives...nice touch..With his dog, he LED the search party right to the body. Neighbours complained to police about his mother burning thngs in the back garden, and the horrible smell therefof, on the day of the murder. (coz aye, one of the first things an innocent person does is burn clothes!).

...and the 3 high judges who independently reviewed the case, at different times, all stated the prosecution was sound (albeit one of them was critical of some aspects of the police investigation).

Every single thing in the programme, is known to the defence team, family, and is in the public domain. Nothing new came out of that programme. Some people trying to make a name for themselves. Everybody loves a conspiracy...

theres mair, but i cant be arsed.

So dae yi think he’s not guilty then Emmy?

 

[emerald green]

So dae yi think he’s not guilty then Emmy?

.... ahken bro apologies!

 

[sockyboy]

I watched the game today with a retired copper (he's my wife's uncle and in oor bubble before the Covid-19 polis start)
Anyway, he was telling me the 2 ex detectives on the documentary were sacked from the force for fraudulent behaviour of some sort.
Not saying that makes Mitchell guilty but it does point towards the documentary not being completely up front and slightly skewed.

 

[hibbybilly]

.... ahken bro apologies!

Nae need, I tend tae agree wi yi. The laddie is a weirdo, sounds like his brother and mother are tae.
One Flew Over Easthooses

 

[EA2007]

I watched the game today with a retired copper (he's my wife's uncle and in oor bubble before the Covid-19 polis start)
Anyway, he was telling me the 2 ex detectives on the documentary were sacked from the force for fraudulent behaviour of some sort.
Not saying that makes Mitchell guilty but it does point towards the documentary not being completely up front and slightly skewed.

They two dumplins did Mitchell no favours!!
Cheesy Quavers not to be taken too seriously.

 

[emerald green]

Nae need, I tend tae agree wi yi. The laddie is a weirdo, sounds like his brother and mother are tae.
One Flew Over Easthooses

someone I know very well is quite close to a member of the victims family bro.... and theres loads of shite bout this which is just untrue. The programme was a biased piece of shit. It was unprofessional gutter reporting. People (not on this board), seem tae be revelling in the devilment of a conspiracy, and the whole shebang was designed to illicit sympathy for this guy.

My sympathy lies wi the wee girl slaughtered, and her family and loved ones...

(but I will butt oot o this thread now....am busy defending my Beloved Hibernian on some other threads )

 

[Jack]

I've been to Universal Studios in Los Angeles a couple of times. On the bus trip round the filming lot the tour guide explains quite clearly 'you see what the director wants you to see and think what he wants you to think.

Although I didn't see this programme with what the tour guide said in mind I look at all that sort of stuff very differently to the way I had done previously.

Their jobs depend on viewing figures, that might not necessarily involve the facts being laid out in a balanced way.

 

[Hattie]

Mitchell and his family specifically told police at the time that he did not want legal representation at the time of the witness staements.

The special defence lodge by Donald Findlay was that he was cooking in the kitchen with him mum at the time.... only when it came to the trial, mitchells brother, under cross examination stated that his mum and brother were not in the house at the time..... because he was upstairs watching internet porn.. and under oath he stated that there is no way he would have watched this had any of his family been in the house at the time. So donald Findlay QC, took all the evidence at hand, and without going hammer and tong at eg circumstanial evidence, he homed in on the special alibi, which then got turned on its head by a member of the accused family! Findlay is nae mug. If there was a way for him to get off with it, Findlay would have found it!

Mitchell loves his blades..... 2 big blades were missing from his set. He etched her initials and birth year and death year into the sheath of one his knives...nice touch..With his dog, he LED the search party right to the body. Neighbours complained to police about his mother burning thngs in the back garden, and the horrible smell therefof, on the day of the murder. (coz aye, one of the first things an innocent person does is burn clothes!).

...and the 3 high judges who independently reviewed the case, at different times, all stated the prosecution was sound (albeit one of them was critical of some aspects of the police investigation).

Every single thing in the programme, is known to the defence team, family, and is in the public domain. Nothing new came out of that programme. Some people trying to make a name for themselves. Everybody loves a conspiracy...

theres mair, but i cant be arsed.

One big thing wrong with that mate. HE never led them straight to the body, all 4 witnesses stated his dog was sniffing like mad at the opening of the wall and he went to check and found her.
But strangely all the other 3 witnesses had changed their story to the exact same changes in court, completely leaving the dog out! They were statements made at the time to police, yet miraculously all 3 had changed stories yo the exact same changes in court.
Far too much inconsistency and massive lack of evidence.. findlay clear never done a decent job

 

[Hattie]

I've been to Universal Studios in Los Angeles a couple of times. On the bus trip round the filming lot the tour guide explains quite clearly 'you see what the director wants you to see and think what he wants you to think.

Although I didn't see this programme with what the tour guide said in mind I look at all that sort of stuff very differently to the way I had done previously.

Their jobs depend on viewing figures, that might not necessarily involve the facts being laid out in a balanced way.

Statements ARE facts. Changing statements in a group to all the same stuff is hugely dodgy