Luke Mitchell trial transcript/case discussion

   A comparison is made between the information in the transcripts from Luke Mitchell's trial - and information out there in the public domain - particularly books written about the case such as Innocents Betrayed, by Sandra Lean. The purpose of this is not to argue guilt or innocence but to compare information and highlight misinformation. (IB = Innocents Betrayed by Dr Sandra Lean) Luke's other girlfriend - Page 169 IB "The claim that he was planning to visit her again in July 2003 was based on Corinne’s plan to holiday in the same place – a plan that had since been cancelled. Jodi and Luke were, in fact, planning a sleepover at a friend’s house the following weekend as part of a birthday celebration – the very weekend the prosecution alleged Luke would be going to see (KT). None of the available evidence supported the claim that Luke was seeing another girl" Corinne's Transcript 13/01/2005 pages 2263 and 2264 P2263 :   Right, was he supposed to be visiting K at...

Calls to the speaking clock from Luke's mobile phone as logged in court transcripts "From 1st Jan of 2003 up to and including 30th June 2003": 3rd Jan: 17:03 (Friday) 4th Jan 12:59 (Saturday) 9th Jan: 11:05 and  12:21 (Thursday) 19th Feb: 16:30 (Wednesday) 28th Feb: 08:36 and 16:23 (Friday) 4th March: 20:49 (Tuesday) 10th March: 08:07 (Monday) 14th March: 19:00 (Friday) 2nd May: 12:27  (Friday) 22nd May: 08:45 *Another call is noted at  16:45, the date is not given but it looks as if this may be the same day (Thursday) 30th June: 16:53 (Monday) Link to transcript (page 1769) https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2024/02/sergeant-thomson-30122004-day-two-of.html

This blog isn't to argue guilt or innocence - I believe that facts are important, and looking at the source of a claim, is imperative. In high profile cases, evidence can often be sensationalized and contorted - if there is any valid argument to be made for the guilt or innocence of an individual, tweaking of the truth to fit a narrative should not be required.  A paragraph in the book 'A long walk to justice', by Scott Forbes, claims that John Ferris, one of the 'moped boys' who was in the vicinity of the murder scene around the time Police believe Jodi was killed, cut his hair so as not to look like the 'Stocky man'.  16 days after the murder, the press released an appeal for information on a Stocky man seen following a girl who resembled Jodi Jones at around 5pm. Police believe Jodi was killed at 5.15pm - her boyfriend Luke Mitchell was convicted of the murder in 2005. It was never ascertained who the 'stocky man' was - but  the author of A long w...

One of the claims being made by campaigners, is that the jury were not made aware of the charges of perverting the course of justice being dropped - see image below:   The jury were made aware - see below for clarification: Page numbers for clarification regarding the jury hearing of Shane Mitchell's charges being dropped; 12/01/05 page 2079 - The jury leave the courtroom In the time between the jury leaving and returning, defence QC Donald Findlay makes an argument that the proceedings against Shane Mitchell for perverting the course of justice, should be dropped. This is eventually agreed after some lengthy discussion. Page 2132 - The jury return to the courtroom https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/shane-mitchell-full-transcript-12012005.html 13/01/05 page 2239 - Shane agrees, in front of the jury, that he had been told that there would be no proceedings against him - pages below: https://lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com/2023/11/shane-mitchell-fu...

  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 Luk...

  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...