haveyouheard1874 Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 (edited) 3 minutes ago, FinnBarr Saunders said: So are you Lukes mum or the roaster pal? What a bore are you Finn.. but fill yer boots and slaver away,, soon be 15k son Edited February 27, 2021 by haveyouheard1874 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor FinnBarr Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 5 minutes ago, haveyouheard1874 said: What a bore you Finn.. but fill yer boots and slaver away,, soon be 15k son Never answered my question? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haveyouheard1874 Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 You are the latter for sure ..15k in running Slaughter & The Dogs - You're a Bore - YouTube Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor FinnBarr Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 3 minutes ago, FinnBarr Saunders said: Never answered my question? ARE YOU LUKES MUM OR THE ROASTER PAL? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor FinnBarr Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 4 minutes ago, FinnBarr Saunders said: ARE YOU LUKES MUM OR THE ROASTER PAL? Can you not Understand "have you heard£ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
haveyouheard1874 Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 (edited) 8 minutes ago, FinnBarr Saunders said: ARE YOU LUKES MUM OR THE ROASTER PAL? Na\w just a poster who can see some serious doubts in the case and conviction .. but crack on Findlay nearly there for 15k Edited February 27, 2021 by haveyouheard1874 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor FinnBarr Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 17 minutes ago, haveyouheard1874 said: What a bore you Finn.. but fill yer boots and slaver away,, soon be 15k son Could you answer my question, are you Lukes mum or the roaster pal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doctor FinnBarr Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 5 minutes ago, haveyouheard1874 said: Na\w just a poster who can some serious doubts in the case and conviction .. but crack on Findlay nearly there for 15k Who the hell is Finlay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iantjambo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 For her to be at the otherside of that wall. Jodi obviously knew her attacker. She wouldn’t have went over it for a stranger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McGlynn The Money Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 5 hours ago, haveyouheard1874 said: You are the latter for sure ..15k in running Slaughter & The Dogs - You're a Bore - YouTube Please answer the question. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maroon Sailor Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 5 hours ago, iantjambo said: For her to be at the otherside of that wall. Jodi obviously knew her attacker. She wouldn’t have went over it for a stranger. Yeah - I have never thought of this murder as some random attack by a stranger. She arranged to meet with Mitchell near where her body was found. His alibi is pretty circumstantial, nobody can really prove where Mitchell was at the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 9 hours ago, McGlynn The Money said: You seem to know a lot about it. I take it you know the real reason she had money problems, nothing to do with Luke? Convenient that he's not around to defend himself, as I said in my post. Google is your friend. John Sallens and Michael Neil Who mentioned money problems and why is that relevant? I have googled it, obviously you haven't or you wouldn't have said "Numerous trials, appeals etc have all reached the same conclusion based on all the evidence." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McGlynn The Money Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 7 minutes ago, graygo said: Who mentioned money problems and why is that relevant? I have googled it, obviously you haven't or you wouldn't have said "Numerous trials, appeals etc have all reached the same conclusion based on all the evidence." Pleading poverty and playing the victim. A wee look at what happened in her caravan business would say otherwise. OK, one trial and countless appeals. Is that better? Happy now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewjambo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 9 hours ago, McGlynn The Money said: The HiddenInjustice Twitter page is worth a read for anyone looking for more info on the case. Debunks the absolute nonsense from the Channel 5 programme. If we are to believe that twitter account Luke's DNA was found on Jodi's bra and also Jodi's DNA was found on Luke's trousers but it was agreed this would not be admissable in court as Luke's defense successfully argued that it shouldn't be used by prosecution due to the physical nature of the victim and the accused's relationship. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 8 hours ago, FinnBarr Saunders said: Its been to court several times, how many times do you want it to go back to see "how it pans out"? Popular misconception that it has been back to court on appeal 4 times and after hearing all the evidence the same guilty verdict has been reached. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 3 minutes ago, McGlynn The Money said: Pleading poverty and playing the victim. A wee look at what happened in her caravan business would say otherwise. OK, one trial and countless appeals. Is that better? Happy now? If you can't count to 3 then I suppose it's better. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McGlynn The Money Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 3 minutes ago, andrewjambo said: If we are to believe that twitter account Luke's DNA was found on Jodi's bra and also Jodi's DNA was found on Luke's trousers but it was agreed this would not be admissable in court as Luke's defense successfully argued that it shouldn't be used by prosecution due to the physical nature of the victim and the accused's relationship. Fair point. However, it was the same with Jodi's sister's boyfriend's DNA being found on the t-shirt she was wearing. That didn't stop that nutter, who spent half the programme speaking out of her car for some reason, bringing it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McGlynn The Money Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 Just now, graygo said: If you can't count to 3 then I suppose it's better. How many appeals and retrials would you like? Money no object, the feelings of the family of the victim that he murdered irrelevant? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 Just now, graygo said: If you can't count to 3 then I suppose it's better. It's two high court appeals, a high court judgement to say it cannot go to the supreme court. One miscarriage of justice Scotland appeal. They've all failed so there are alot of learned people a lot thicker than the Kickback Poirots Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 1 minute ago, McGlynn The Money said: How many appeals and retrials would you like? Money no object, the feelings of the family of the victim that he murdered irrelevant? As many appeals as are required if there is still doubt, you can't put a price on justice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 1 minute ago, John Findlay said: It's two high court appeals, a high court judgement to say it cannot go to the supreme court. One miscarriage of justice Scotland appeal. They've all failed so there are alot of learned people a lot thicker than the Kickback Poirots So how many of those "countless" appeals heard all the evidence? Maybe you could let @McGlynn The Money know, he can't count to big numbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 2 minutes ago, graygo said: So how many of those "countless" appeals heard all the evidence? Maybe you could let @McGlynn The Money know, he can't count to big numbers. I should imagine they heard all available evidence. I will trust their judgement, better than two iffy ex detectives and a woman author off the telly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Brown Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 6 minutes ago, McGlynn The Money said: How many appeals and retrials would you like? Money no object, the feelings of the family of the victim that he murdered irrelevant? Has there ever been a re-trial? I don't believe so. Entirely different thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewjambo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 10 minutes ago, McGlynn The Money said: Fair point. However, it was the same with Jodi's sister's boyfriend's DNA being found on the t-shirt she was wearing. That didn't stop that nutter, who spent half the programme speaking out of her car for some reason, bringing it up. It puts a massive hole in the Corinne Mitchell/Sandra Lean position that no DNA of Luke's was found at the scene. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 1 minute ago, John Findlay said: I should imagine they heard all available evidence. I will trust their judgement, better than two iffy ex detectives and a woman author off the telly. You would imagine wrong then. A procedural appeal doesn't hear evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 4 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said: Has there ever been a re-trial? I don't believe so. Entirely different thing. No there hasn't, that would require a new jury to hear all the evidence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 2 minutes ago, graygo said: You would imagine wrong then. A procedural appeal doesn't hear evidence. So all the appeals have been procedural is what you are saying? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Brown Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 1 minute ago, graygo said: No there hasn't, that would require a new jury to hear all the evidence. Exactly Appeals just look at the process, was it followed correctly. Re-trual I assume would need fresh evidence to prove an unsafe conviction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 (edited) 9 minutes ago, John Findlay said: So all the appeals have been procedural is what you are saying? No, that's not what I'm saying, it's never been what I said. I've not even hinted at it. All I said was that the opposite wasn't the case. Edited February 27, 2021 by graygo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 Just to add to the count.....the original trial was abandoned and they had to start again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 1 minute ago, graygo said: No, that's not what I'm saying, it's never been what I said. I've not even hinted at it. All I said was that the opposite wasn't the case. Sp the appeals that have failed so far, the evidence was heard and gone over? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewjambo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said: Exactly Appeals just look at the process, was it followed correctly. Re-trual I assume would need fresh evidence to prove an unsafe conviction. I don't think that's correct as the 2008 appeal looked at both evidence and procedure/process Edited February 27, 2021 by andrewjambo Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 Just now, John Findlay said: Sp the appeals that have failed so far, the evidence was heard and gone over? I give up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 Just now, graygo said: I give up. Good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 Just now, andrewjambo said: I don't think that's correct as the 2008 appeal looked at both evidence and procedure. Correct, it was the only one. 3 judges looked at the evidence and agreed there was enough evidence for a jury to return s verdict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 1 minute ago, John Findlay said: Good. Good for my sanity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 Just now, graygo said: Good for my sanity. Yes I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewjambo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 3 minutes ago, graygo said: Correct, it was the only one. 3 judges looked at the evidence and agreed there was enough evidence for a jury to return s verdict. The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) concluded in 2014 that there was no grounds to challenge the appeal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 2 minutes ago, John Findlay said: Yes I agree. Well it's not difficult to grasp, someone claimed all the appeals heard all the evidence, I said that not all the appeals heard all the evidence some were procedural. For some reason you ask if I'm saying all the appeals were procedural and when I say no not all of them you then ask if all the evidence was heard at all the appeals. I'm away to explain quantum mechanics to my 9 year old, it'll be easier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 7 minutes ago, andrewjambo said: The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) concluded in 2014 that there was no grounds to challenge the appeal. Not sure what point you're making there. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 10 minutes ago, graygo said: Well it's not difficult to grasp, someone claimed all the appeals heard all the evidence, I said that not all the appeals heard all the evidence some were procedural. For some reason you ask if I'm saying all the appeals were procedural and when I say no not all of them you then ask if all the evidence was heard at all the appeals. I'm away to explain quantum mechanics to my 9 year old, it'll be easier. Yes be better for your sanity too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrewjambo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 10 minutes ago, graygo said: Not sure what point you're making there. Simply that on three occasions - original trial, 2008 appeal and 2014 SCCRC review - the evidence for and against Luke Mitchell has been considered. Does that count as numerous? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 10 minutes ago, John Findlay said: Yes be better for your sanity too. Yes, I said that already. Did you forget because you've said it twice since I did? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 10 minutes ago, andrewjambo said: Simply that on three occasions - original trial, 2008 appeal and 2014 SCCRC review - the evidence for and against Luke Mitchell has been considered. Does that count as numerous? Whether the number 3 is "numerous" or not is subjective. I would say it isn't. The 2014 SCCRC review was just that, a review. It wasn't an appeal and in fact decided that there were no grounds to go to appeal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peakybunnet Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 10 minutes ago, graygo said: Whether the number 3 is "numerous" or not is subjective. I would say it isn't. The 2014 SCCRC review was just that, a review. It wasn't an appeal and in fact decided that there were no grounds to go to appeal. You are scraping the barrel here, its embarrassing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Findlay Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 18 minutes ago, graygo said: Yes, I said that already. Did you forget because you've said it twice since I did? Yes i must be going as insane as yourself. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 5 minutes ago, Peakybunnet said: You are scraping the barrel here, its embarrassing. What part? All of it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graygo Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 5 minutes ago, John Findlay said: Yes i must be going as insane as yourself. You're way past that pal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
¼½¾ Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 1 hour ago, Candy said: Just to add to the count.....the original trial was abandoned and they had to start again That doesn't count. The trial had to be restarted as it turned out that one of the jurors knew one of the witnesses against Mitchell. Which only reinforces Mitchell's defences claim that the trial should not have been held in Edinburgh. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
felix Posted February 27, 2021 Share Posted February 27, 2021 7 minutes ago, Lemongrab said: That doesn't count. The trial had to be restarted as it turned out that one of the jurors knew one of the witnesses against Mitchell. Which only reinforces Mitchell's defences claim that the trial should not have been held in Edinburgh. Correct. Don't think the trial should have been anywhere near Edinburgh. Having said that, the months of press coverage before the trial, would surely have made it difficult for anyone in Scotland not to have some view on the accused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.