Luke Mitchell trial transcript/case discussion

It has become the narrative of some of Luke Mitchell's supporters, that a stocky man last seen walking closely behind Jodi, was her real killer. Furthermore, it is claimed that this stocky man, was her own brother. Photos of Jodi's brother and family members have been posted online, along with statements like "Jodi's brother, the real killer' and 'Jodi's granny knew, I hope she burns in hell'. Let's have a look at some of claims that have been made in relation to this accusation, where they come from and how reliable they are. 1 . The Stocky man sighting Where did it come from? On 16/07/2003, an appeal was released in the press asking for information after two independent witnesses had spotted a girl matching Jodi's description walking along Easthouses Road at around 5pm, towards the entrance to Roan's Dyke path. According the witnesses, she was followed closely by a stocky man.  http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3070589.stm . The man may

Innocents betrayed page 60:   "Part way through the police interrogation on July 4th having said that he didn’t think he had spoken to Jodi by phone on June 30th, Luke said, “No, wait, I did phone. I phoned the house... her mother’s boyfriend answered it. He said Jodi had left... he said they’d just left. I think he just meant Jodi.” Luke's statements from July 4th were read out during the trial:  "Wait. I phoned when I was out. I phoned them when I was out the house and I said has Jodi left yet and they went "She's just left a wee while a go", I think it was (incomprehensible).   Update/clarification*     What seems to be a transcript from Luke's 4th July 03 interview has just recently been shared online by one of the groups, pointing out that Luke replied 'they've' just left, after the part read at trial. This is the first time that this has been shared publicly, with both parts of this statement.  In Innocents betrayed, the statement, in q

  Where did the Manson theory come from?  This blog isn't intended to argue guilt or innocence, we will take a look at the Manson theory, possible origins and relevance to the case. IB Page 230:   "During Luke’s first interview as a Voluntary Attender on July 4th, Marilyn Manson was mentioned several times – each time the investigating officers came back to the music Luke liked, even though he’d told them his favourites were Eminem and Nirvana, he was “reminded” about Manson. The question is why? Luke did not express any particular interest in Manson, yet the investigating officers added his name to any list of preferred bands or musicians that Luke volunteered." During a discussion with Dr Campbell at some point prior to October 2004 - after his arrest, Luke explains who Elizabeth Short was and that she was portrayed by dancers in the Marylin Manson DVD. He describes the injuries sustained by Short, including chunks of skin removed from her chin and left breast and injur

  The above statement was made Scott Forbes, author of the book 'A long walk to justice'. The book focuses on the murder of Jodi Jones and claimed wrongful conviction of Luke Mitchell.  Campaign supporters were told by Dr Sandra Lean, who previously worked on the case with Forbes, that trial transcripts weren't available. This is incorrect, they are available - but interestingly, the discussion of the transcripts online has resulted in personal attacks by campaign leaders.  Despite writing a book based on the case and regularly referring to what happened at the trial, Mr Forbes has stated that he hasn't read the transcripts:     This could explain the list of discrepancies below. These are just some. Surely books should be fact checked, and if the author is not willing to look at the available resources - where exactly are they getting the facts from? A long walk to Justice (ALWTJ) , by Scott Forbes page 919 "Records show the knife was handed in to Police by Luke&#

  In November 2022, the story broke in the Scottish Sun, that Police had destroyed evidence from the Jodi Jones murder case. The claim was, that this had been done illicitly: https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9846975/cops-destroyed-evidence-jodi-jones-luke-mitchell/ The article states: " It then emerged that detectives had mysteriously taken it all away in September 2021 - just a few months after a shock TV documentary claimed there was major doubt on Mitchell’s guilt." According to Scott Forbes, when the documentary aired, somebody was told by a member of the Police that the productions from the case were being destroyed.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KSLM2jxngXc The documentary aired on Channel 5 in February 2021.  In an interview in November 2023, Mr Forbes said that the Police person had come to him " maybe 18 months ago" , which would be around May 2022 - 15 months after the documentary first aired.  If it is the case that someone was informed near the

  To be clear, the point of this blog is not to suggest that the other samples have indeed been tested, or that there is any deceit at play. I do however, think it's completely reasonable to ask these questions after some of the information that has recently come to light.  In November 2022, the story broke that Police had been in the process of destroying the productions from Luke Mitchell's case.   https://www.thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9846975/cops-destroyed-evidence-jodi-jones-luke-mitchell/ It was claimed that 300 samples remained - including untested semen samples taken from Jodi's body. https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news/edinburgh-news/midlothian-prisoner-luke-mitchells-lawyer-27593040 " After the show aired, Mr Forbes applied for access to evidence and material gathered by  police ahead only to learn it was in the process of being destroyed. It was halted by the Lord Advocate, but only 300 samples are said to remain. Private Eye states that these include 10 sa