Jump to content

Jodi Jones murder re-examined


Sten Guns

Recommended Posts

Eldar Hadzimehmedovic

I can't help compare it to the Suzanne Piley case. Both convicted on circumstantial evidence but the evidence against Gilroy was overwhelming. Even from the outside it seems so clear he's guilty. 

 

But from hazy memory and Wikipedia (I know, I know) the main evidence against Mitchell is the fact he found the body, someone saying they might have seen someone like him near the scene, and someone saying he might have burned his clothes (no evidence found in incinerator). That doesn't seem like much for a murder conviction tbf. I imagine the jury was told more though. 

Edited by Eldar Hadzimehmedovic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 832
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • graygo

    63

  • McGlynn The Money

    40

  • Tommy Brown

    27

  • haveyouheard1874

    27

7 minutes ago, Eldar Hadzimehmedovic said:

I can't help compare it to the Suzanne Piley case. Both convicted on circumstantial evidence but the evidence against Gilroy was overwhelming. Even from the outside it seems so clear he's guilty. 

 

But from hazy memory and Wikipedia (I know, I know) the main evidence against Mitchell is the fact he found the body, someone saying they might have seen someone like him near the scene, and someone saying he might have burned his clothes (no evidence found in incinerator). That doesn't seem like much for a murder conviction tbf. I imagine the jury was told more though. 

 

Yes, they were told that he kept bottles of piss under his bed. Would have convinced me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Eldar Hadzimehmedovic said:

I can't help compare it to the Suzanne Piley case. Both convicted on circumstantial evidence but the evidence against Gilroy was overwhelming. Even from the outside it seems so clear he's guilty. 

 

But from hazy memory and Wikipedia (I know, I know) the main evidence against Mitchell is the fact he found the body, someone saying they might have seen someone like him near the scene, and someone saying he might have burned his clothes (no evidence found in incinerator). That doesn't seem like much for a murder conviction tbf. I imagine the jury was told more though. 

 

The defence argued evidence against Gilroy was circumstantial, and with no body, it was an unusual conviction. However the chain of circumstances and  timeline of events , plus evidence of a struggle, convinced a jury. 

The circumstances & events in Mitchell's case, were nowhere near as clear, imo - however the jury still remained in no doubt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, graygo said:

 

Jodie Jones and her family haven't been forgotten about, why would you say that?

Compared to Mitchell I would say they have been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had that show on in the background last night and from the bits I seen it appears that absolutely nothing new was presented? There is also absolutely 0% chance that they had only just found out that the other suspect, Mark something, had died the previous year. These shows are researched well before they are filmed to ensure they have the right people to speak to. The detective must be eyeing up an Oscar for that shocked reaction.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dusk_Till_Dawn
5 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

Had that show on in the background last night and from the bits I seen it appears that absolutely nothing new was presented? There is also absolutely 0% chance that they had only just found out that the other suspect, Mark something, had died the previous year. These shows are researched well before they are filmed to ensure they have the right people to speak to. The detective must be eyeing up an Oscar for that shocked reaction.

 

 

 

 


It’s Channel 5 man. Was the show sponsored by Gala Bingo or something?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/02/2021 at 11:27, Greenbank2 said:

 

I once sat on a Jury that went to deliberation. 3 accused. These are direct quotes from my fellow jurors......

"They're scum. I dunno if they done this but if they didn't, they done something else. Guilty".

"I'm saying not proven. For now. If we can spin this out another hour, I'll get another day off my work".

 

The judge gave very specific direction on what evidence to consider, which was immediately ignored by a substantial number of the 15 as soon the jury room was entered,

 

Just sayin' likesay.

Yes I was on a high court jury one time . There was a obese jambo supporter on it too . All he was interested. In was What we would have for lunch . There was another person who was convinced of the accused guilt from day one and never wavered despite days of evidence . There was all different types on the jury . I was the foreman and read out the verdict . Bloody nerve wracking but felt great to say “ not guilty “ and see the accused fall apart with relief and joy at the verdict ( case should never have went to court really ) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, John Findlay said:

Compared to Mitchell I would say they have been.

 

Nonsense, talking about one party more than the other does not mean the other has been forgotten about.

If there is doubt about his conviction then it's important that it's cleared up for him as well as Jodie Jones and her family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did get the impression last night that they're trying to pin it on the junkie boy, who conveniently can no longer defend himself. 🤔

 

Looking forward to tonight's episode.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, graygo said:

 

Nonsense, talking about one party more than the other does not mean the other has been forgotten about.

If there is doubt about his conviction then it's important that it's cleared up for him as well as Jodie Jones and her family.

We will have to agree to disagree re the Jones family.

If Luke Mitchell has been wrongly convicted, then it is only proper that a wrong is righted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never seen it but it’s obvious a one sided story to put doubt about the conviction into peoples minds. 
 

The people at the trail seen both sides of the story so you just have to hope they made the right decision 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, theshed said:

Never seen it but it’s obvious a one sided story to put doubt about the conviction into peoples minds. 
 

The people at the trail seen both sides of the story so you just have to hope they made the right decision 

 

Was also appealed 3 times I believe so the top judges in the land would have deliberated over the evidence in a factual way.

 

Unlike Juries who as others have made comment on, dont have a scooby doo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, theshed said:

Never seen it but it’s obvious a one sided story to put doubt about the conviction into peoples minds. 
 

The people at the trial seen both sides of the story so you just have to hope they made the right decision 

 

That is the vital issue, have they?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said:

 

That is the vital issue, have they?


I agree but as with the post above regarding top judges looking at the appeal surely not everyone is wrong 🤷‍♀️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A robust centre forward

I have been following and reading the various comments over the last few days having been a resident of the area at the time this brutal murder took place. I know both families and can not imagine the grief at losing a daughter in this way. Although part one of the C5 doc was amateurish at times, having read a lot of evidence that was somehow not presented at trial and the prosecution evidence (no DNA of LM at the scene, no attack marks on LM, the constant changing of witness statements, the doctor examination at the police station after he was taken from the murder scene confirming he had not bathed in 24 hours) and the way his defence team represented him at trial, having served on juries and from what I have since read there is no way I would have returned a guilty verdict. I also knew police involved who were happy to discuss items of the investigation early on but as soon as he was charged, they did not say anymore in case it might produce the outcome of the trial. They were all of the opinion he was guilty, even though with The advancements in forensics, there was no scientific evidence that was presentable to court. The police knew that Newbattle Abbey was at the time a residential college for some adult students, who were not your stereotypical students and why the police did not seemingly follow up on at least one of them was a mystery. There are lots of habitual offenders who have served time with LM who are convinced of his innocence. One of the men accused of the ice cream war killings, served 20 years in jail for a crime he did not commit and is convinced that the wrong person is in jail. Before you watch part 2 tonight, if you have the time I would urge you to watch the learned criminologist Dr Sandra Lean interview with James English. She has had full access to the defence teams papers and since published a book challenging the police, prosecution and the defence of this trial and has never been sued or told to redacted any of her statements. The interview is thought provoking and clears up a lot of the headlines that MSM thought fit to publish at the time. Remember one young life has been destroyed and one young man is in jail, still protesting his innocence after 18 years and is prepared to spend the rest of his days inside by not being eligible for parole if he does not change his plea. There is no new evidence available but the information available at the time of the trial that led to a conviction certainly needs to be brought to the wider public's attention. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanks said no

Stupid layman’s question - can Luke Mitchell be paroled after serving 20+ years if he continues to plead his innocence? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanks said no
15 minutes ago, The Frenchman Returns said:

Stupid layman’s question - can Luke Mitchell be paroled after serving 20+ years if he continues to plead his innocence? 

To answer my own question, taken from Parole Board website 

 

Will the Board release an offender who denies his/her guilt?

 

Release on parole does not depend upon an offender admitting his/her guilt. It is not the function of the Board to investigate possible miscarriages of justice or to raise any misgivings about the correctness of a conviction. The Board will consider the likelihood of re-offending by taking account of the nature of the offence of which the offender has been convicted in a court, any previous convictions, attitude and response in prison and reports from prison staff and social work reports.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Modern Leper

I struggle to get past the idea of a 14 year old boy committing such a brutal slaying, almost to the point of decapitating his victim, and being able to leave himself without any incriminating dna evidence upon his person. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is important to keep an open mind. I don't know the ins and outs of the case but imagine if there really was a serious misscarriage of justice here and that laddies been wrongly convicted. That would be ****ing horrendous and would make the whole thing even sadder. 

 

Unfortunately it seems the Police made an absolute dugs dinner of the investigation and didn't do their due diligence either investigatory or forensically, so the chances of him being cleared or finding another suspect are now extremely slim. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, The Modern Leper said:

I struggle to get past the idea of a 14 year old boy committing such a brutal slaying, almost to the point of decapitating his victim, and being able to leave himself without any incriminating dna evidence upon his person. 

I can't quite get my head around this as well. He could very well be guilty (I know as per the court he is guilty) but beyond reasonable doubt? I have my doubts on some very basic evidence presented in his defence. Dressing like a goth and pissing in bottles doesn't swing it for me. What is very clear, the media circus around him and his family made it very difficult to have an unprejudiced jury. In my opinion, of course. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, graygo said:

 

Yes, they were told that he kept bottles of piss under his bed. Would have convinced me.

What is it with people doing that with bottles of piss.

 

Girl next door to me had a lodger to help pay the Bill's when one day she was cleaning and went into his room and found them underneath his bed.

 

She swiftly told him to move out thank christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Салатные палочки
1 minute ago, Madjambo21 said:

What is it with people doing that with bottles of piss.

 

Girl next door to me had a lodger to help pay the Bill's when one day she was cleaning and went into his room and found them underneath his bed.

 

She swiftly told him to move out thank christ.

 

Is it not an OCD symptom? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Salad Fingers said:

 

Is it not an OCD symptom? 

Or in some cases a symptom of locking yourself in your bedroom and spending all your time playing video games and ripping the heid off it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO I think he is guilty. 

 

I've read a lot on this case (including the appeal docs) and sure its circumstantial but everything for me points to Luke killing her and attempting to fabricate a defence in the hours after her murder.

 

That TV show didn't feel like an unbiased view on the murder but a slightly cheesy and one sided sob story about his mum and him.

 

A new potential suspect who is now dead seems a bit desperate as well.

 

From tbrough my own family I've heard that some of the Police in charge of the operation were not highly regarded and the media coverage did paint a bad picture of Luke pre trial. 

 

I have previously been part of a jury that returned a not proven verdict in a case years back where the majority of us believed the defendant was guilty but we followed the rules of the court and advice of the judge to base our verdict on all the evidence and statements in court. It didn't feel great but it was based on the evidence and not personal feelings. Its a tenuous link to this case but I guess I'm trying to say I have faith in our justice system and that faith extends to other prosecutions being delivered by hopefully like-minded jurors.

 

Regardless of bottles of piss under his bed and being perceives as a bit of a bad boy....all the circumstantial evidence at this time for me points directly at Luke Mitchell.

 

The opportunity, the ability, the contradictory alibis, the missing jacket, his behaviour on the day and weeks after for me still points very very heavily at him in my eyes.

 

Personally I don't like these types of TV shows (yet I always watch them). I imagine Jodi's family must be terribly distraught at it and could it not be argued that this is kind of like a reflection of the media coverage against Luke and portraying a negative image of him but now we're to feel sorry for him and his mum because maybe he didn't do it. (I've not described this well but in my head I know what im trying to say).

 

Horrible horrible crime but I believe the guilty party is deservedly in jail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That "Experiment" with the lassie driving passed the reconstruction of the couple is one of the most ridiculous attempts at trying to prove a point that I've ever seen. 

 

No danger these guys are real PI's with any success rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

That "Experiment" with the lassie driving passed the reconstruction of the couple is one of the most ridiculous attempts at trying to prove a point that I've ever seen. 

 

No danger these guys are real PI's with any success rate.


look them up, one of them was under investigation for fraud.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fxxx the SPFL

it does seem a bit flakey these two ex cops but there is certainly some questions that still need to be asked surely the fact that he was interviewed without a lawyer etc just on a technical point would cast some doubt

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, hughesie27 said:

That "Experiment" with the lassie driving passed the reconstruction of the couple is one of the most ridiculous attempts at trying to prove a point that I've ever seen. 

 

No danger these guys are real PI's with any success rate.

 

 

👍  was getting annoyed watching that.

 

 

 

Btw the mother isn't living in the old office now, has been rehoused and that Sandra Lean has set up a gofundme page to help her get back on her feet. 🙄

 

Beginning to think this Sandra Lean is just as whacko as the mother. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Der Kaiser said:

IMHO I think he is guilty. 

 

I've read a lot on this case (including the appeal docs) and sure its circumstantial but everything for me points to Luke killing her and attempting to fabricate a defence in the hours after her murder.

 

That TV show didn't feel like an unbiased view on the murder but a slightly cheesy and one sided sob story about his mum and him.

 

A new potential suspect who is now dead seems a bit desperate as well.

 

From tbrough my own family I've heard that some of the Police in charge of the operation were not highly regarded and the media coverage did paint a bad picture of Luke pre trial. 

 

I have previously been part of a jury that returned a not proven verdict in a case years back where the majority of us believed the defendant was guilty but we followed the rules of the court and advice of the judge to base our verdict on all the evidence and statements in court. It didn't feel great but it was based on the evidence and not personal feelings. Its a tenuous link to this case but I guess I'm trying to say I have faith in our justice system and that faith extends to other prosecutions being delivered by hopefully like-minded jurors.

 

Regardless of bottles of piss under his bed and being perceives as a bit of a bad boy....all the circumstantial evidence at this time for me points directly at Luke Mitchell.

 

The opportunity, the ability, the contradictory alibis, the missing jacket, his behaviour on the day and weeks after for me still points very very heavily at him in my eyes.

 

Personally I don't like these types of TV shows (yet I always watch them). I imagine Jodi's family must be terribly distraught at it and could it not be argued that this is kind of like a reflection of the media coverage against Luke and portraying a negative image of him but now we're to feel sorry for him and his mum because maybe he didn't do it. (I've not described this well but in my head I know what im trying to say).

 

Horrible horrible crime but I believe the guilty party is deservedly in jail.

Far far far too many unnerving unanswered questions for my liking. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JamboSpur said:


look them up, one of them was under investigation for fraud.

Both were punted out the police for Corruption.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Madjambo21 said:

What is it with people doing that with bottles of piss.

 

Girl next door to me had a lodger to help pay the Bill's when one day she was cleaning and went into his room and found them underneath his bed.

 

She swiftly told him to move out thank christ.


Downstairs toilet and can’t be arsed walking down the stairs so pee in a bottle 🤷‍♀️🤷‍♀️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Restonbabe said:

Far far far too many unnerving unanswered questions for my liking. 

 

 

There are unanswered questions....absolutely. It didn't appear to be managed well by police and media.

 

It's a case that will always provoke debate. Until told otherwise I'm confident with my belief.

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Salad Fingers said:

 

What was the outcome of that? 

 

Think they jumped before pushed. 

 

They have no credibility and C5 scraped the barrell bringing them in as "experts" 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanks said no
1 minute ago, Salad Fingers said:

 

What was the outcome of that? 

 

I mentioned being told about them earlier in the thread by an ex cop, will be seeing him tomorrow and try to get more info. Ex Police seemingly have forums / messageboards and its been a hot topic of conversation pre programme, this pair have a massive grudge.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, neilnunb said:

 

 

👍  was getting annoyed watching that.

 

 

 

Btw the mother isn't living in the old office now, has been rehoused and that Sandra Lean has set up a gofundme page to help her get back on her feet. 🙄

 

Beginning to think this Sandra Lean is just as whacko as the mother. 

 

 

Sandra Lean turned up on hear I seem to recall, or someone very close to her and the case, on a previous thread. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Салатные палочки
2 minutes ago, The Frenchman Returns said:

 

I mentioned being told about them earlier in the thread by an ex cop, will be seeing him tomorrow and try to get more info. Ex Police seemingly have forums / messageboards and its been a hot topic of conversation pre programme, this pair have a massive grudge.

 

Imagine the dirt flying around those forums :laugh:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Tazio said:

Or in some cases a symptom of locking yourself in your bedroom and spending all your time playing video games and ripping the heid off it. 

I do that regularly, like most folk on here, but I still get up to go piss in the garden like a normal person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Shanks said no
1 minute ago, Salad Fingers said:

 

Imagine the dirt flying around those forums :laugh:

 

Hence why I didn't get the full story, I was too busy pissing myself laughing😁

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...