There was a time when campaigners fighting the claimed wrongful conviction of Luke Mitchell raged against the vilification of a 14 year old boy, who they shouted, had not been proven to have committed the crime. Their fight fueled by the abhorrent public denigration of an individual, by a media who cared not for facts, only sensationalism.
While the campaign has evolved from the 2021 documentary, in to a petition and protests - recent online presence from campaign leaders, one in particular, seems to be well represented in the screen shots below.
This online torrent of personal attacks appears to come as a response to campaigners highlighting discrepancies between newly released transcripts, and freedom of information responses - and 'case facts' provided by the two main campaign leaders.
Some of the people asking questions are individuals who have dedicated the past few years of their lives to fighting for the truth and believing that a miscarriage of justice had occurred. I believe they are well within their rights to ask questions after finding out that some of the fundamental points they have based their dedication to the campaign on, and furthermore, shouted out loud - have not been based on truth at all. See https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/transcript-comparison-notes.html
Many of the people asking questions aren't out here trying to convince anyone of guilt or innocence, just 'here's the facts'. Even those who are not supporters but whom are making an argument for guilt, do not deserve the ad hominem and abuse thrown at them.
While the questions being asked by myself and others focus mainly on the case facts - we are met with a barrage of personal accusations and abuse - none of which have any real foundation in truth. One of the campaign leaders behind these attacks is Mr Scott Forbes, who claims to have at one point worked on the case as a lawyer. He has made no attempt to either back up any of these claims or accusations, or explain how they are relevant to the points being made. Some followers of Mr Forbes are keen to jump on the bandwagon of sharing his posts, without knowing or seeming to care whether what is being claimed, is true.
The irony seems to be lost...
The first screen shot below is a recent discussion between Mr Forbes and a supporter. Mr Forbes makes accusations about a wheel chair user's ability to walk. He is referring to a campaigner who has done a considerable amount for Luke's case on social media, and revealed bullying issues within the campaign.
He then goes on to mock the campaigner who uses a wheelchair and it's reposted by followers...
After a freedom of information response was shared online confirming that a knife Mr Forbes claimed hadn't been tested, actually had been, this was his response:
Link to blog with the FOI/knife background : https://lmtranscriptdiscussion.blogspot.com/2023/12/the-knife-in-skip-at-home-farm-was.html
When a video was shared online referencing some differences between Mr Forbes' responses in a video and information from transcripts/other sources - instead of responding to the points made in the video, he responded with this:
Campaigners were told by Dr Sandra Lean that transcripts were not available when in reality, they are. Questions after their release were met with this response from Mr Forbes:
He also claimed that the transcripts were being altered - another unfounded claim.
Mr Forbes is the author of a book called A long walk to justice, which details the case. He states he hasn't read the court transcripts himself.
The spokesperson for Luke Mitchell's campaign also responded by means of doxing. The claim here about being led by a women whose motive is lust after Luke Mitchell is a bizzare fabrication:
And more...
The claim here of running to child haters is also not founded on any truth.
And more abuse...
It is not clear who Mr Forbes believes has 'phoned' him here...
There are also personal attacks on the victim's family - where do these claims come from and are they respectful to Jodi?
Supporters have also been threatened by Mr Forbes (this is from another supporter who wanted to ask questions):
More unsubstantiated claims and abuse from Luke's spokesperson
There have been mistaken identities on at least three occasions - here, the campaign leader is accusing the owner of a YouTube channel (not a supporter of Luke's campaign) of being an individual that he is not - along with personal and unrelated attacks. (He has previously condoned the sharing online, of photographs of individuals, claiming they were connected to the case - including the Senior investigating officer. They were the wrong people.)
The following screen shots are not from Mr Forbes but from admins of the two main groups run by Dr Sandra Lean, after a supporter queried why we had been told the transcripts were not available, when they were:
Link to blog with context, Dr Lean's dissemination of transcript availability:
The groups claimed that the transcripts had been doctored - the claim here was that the jury had not been informed of the charges of perverting the course of justice against Luke's mum and brother being dropped, and that somehow, the transcripts had been altered to make it look like they had indeed been informed. What was not posted by the groups, was subsequent pages where the jury were informed. The jury were informed of the charges being dropped and the transcripts have not been altered.
As some further observations relating to bullying, here are some screen shots showing the abuse that a journalist who reported on the case, as a matter of public record, received:
The reporter received hate from Forbes, including being likened to a 'peadophile' after writing an article opposing the points covered in the Channel 5 documentary, Murder in a small town:
And the unproven accusations and personal attacks continue...
It has become apparent however, that these bullying tactics have gone on for some time and are not as recent as first believed. Below is a post from Mark Kane, an individual who Mr Forbes thinks should have been a suspect. Mr Kane has since passed away, but his words detailing the treatment he received can still be viewed on the UK justice forum he posted on in 2014.
The man he refers to is Mr Forbes.
How can a campaign which proposes to fight for truth and justice with a focus on the 'real case facts' - accept and condone the bullying of people who ask questions and highlight facts?
How has the campaign evolved in to supporters of justice unquestioningly sharing posts which make unsubstantiated personal claims about individuals in a vicious manner?
How can a campaign which criticizes the abuse of one, accept it being done to others, without question?
It seems that the real truth is only what campaign leaders say that it is, and anyone who questions outside of this narrative is automatically deemed a troll and publicly abused.
And this is all done in the name of justice for Jodi Jones and Luke Mitchell...
A campaigner who had been involved in the case since 2021 shares their thoughts:
"When it gets to the stage where supporters need to create salacious lies and adopt pantomime antics to get people saying Luke's name, rather than using the same energy to spread the word about this injustice in a constructive way, they have veered right into troll territory - and what do people do with trolls? They ignore them. So they have created an environment where new people will look and say, nah they have no credibility they are all nutjobs from the top down!
How does that help Luke Mitchell?"
.png)
Comments
Post a Comment