Killer Luke Mitchell’s DNA & The Constant Lies & Manipulation By Hoaxer Sandra Lean (Part 128)

‘Flying Monkey’ Val Young’s Projections

*Guest Blog*

Val – Let me do this in baby steps for you.

The DNA of another male upon the clothing of the victim = guilty verdict.

All before that Jury.

Presence Of Killer Luke Mitchell’s DNA

Two clear donors, one Luke Mitchell and one Steven Kelly.

There was NO forensic evidence linking Luke Mitchell directly to the murder, not that there was NO presence of his DNA.

Two different entities.

Let me take your mind all the way back to August 2003 when no warrant was issued for an arrest, anything they had of Luke Mitchell’s around his DNA was to be of no value.

And as you make clear, there was the presence of someone else’s DNA –

How would that have favoured for the Crown?

To try and claim that Luke Mitchell’s must have been left there at the time of the murder whilst showing that Steven Kelly’s was left at another point in time.

One the victim’s boyfriend in an intimate relationship, the other not.

Both being applied in the only way it could be, for without doubt Steven Kelly’s was not left there at the time of the murder, and it could never be shown when Luke Mitchell’s was actually left due to being in a close relationship with the victim.

The DNA Agreement

Now for the best part, that agreement made between the Crown and defence, double fold my dear.

Introducing the forensics into the case, starting off with Luke Mitchell, to then stop and show the court, that they would have NO more discussion around anything applicable to Luke Mitchell, but also, that there was nothing, that is zero, pointing the murder to that of a stranger, to a another. Exclusive of Steven Kelly.

Where naturally the whole process had to be before that court.

That was the point in time of making it clear that the evidence and the case to be heard against Luke Mitchell was to be purely on a circumstantial basis (Note: DNA is also circumstantial evidence).

IF there had been none and no more, then no agreement need have been made.

The hunt for the silver bullet, seriously?

Where you are shown without a shadow of any doubt that there was NO messing with those forensics, everything fully disclosed, such as the DNA belonging to Stephen Kelly.

What does one’s small mind believe can be produced to top another person’s sperm upon the victims clothing?

For the rest, and again, IF one wishes to include Steven Kelly as being present, they are NOT excluding Luke Mitchell. But he was not present, those remnants from ejaculation of millions or sperm heads, that trace transferral and water diffusion.

The Further Cock & Bull Around DNA Re-Testing

Interestingly when discussing this with Sandra Lean, who says it does not matter after the murder if science could prove that transferral, she stated techniques were not in place at the time, so I said to her, so that must include everything then in your way of thinking, one is wasting their time wanting anything re-tested with the advancement in techniques, they surely do not count also Sandra Lean, do they?

Do we just freeze everything in time bar what suit’s purpose to yourself?

The Scottish criminal cases review commission (SCCRC) and the further cock and bull around the re-testing, it simply was not good enough is the claim, the actual experts in their field, who studied those original test and reports, who then gave advice on what was MERITABLE to test, and what did they find dear Val?

Do you even know, or is your head so deeply buried into the mire it does not interest you?

Charlatan Sandra Lean Does Not Know The Reason For The Agreement

The agreement and the blatant manipulation around it.

Where Sandra Lean is telling you that she does NOT know the reason for it being in place, with lots of ‘It makes no sense ———-‘ then diverts off into all sorts with horrendous conclusions put in place.

At one point in time, she had half of Midlothian present at the murder with her massive lack of understanding and manipulation, her in excess of 10 different males from sperm and all sorts, in the days of running the WAP forum.

Now narrowed down to five, one a condom some distance from the body, another in a cave in another area of woodland altogether –

Behave.

But it is this, that she claims the Mitchell’s had told her of another “source” making them aware of the agreement.

She is telling you two things here or a combination of both, that Luke Mitchell lied to her, he was present when the agreement was made, his is direct source, that you can bet your bottom dollar dear Val, that anything he may have failed to understand, explained in full to him at the end of each day’s proceedings, so he has lied to her or she is lying to you, or as stated, a mixture of both in this game of manipulation they play.

Got to love a bit of logic or not in this case? –

Where in this giant world of conspiracy, we have his original defence placed as having their hands tied so firmly behind their back, they appear to have caught fast that zip one has placed up it.

Or the police, that they were so incompetent and inadequate yet managed to have the Crown produce 42days of evidence, that not once has even come close to being disproved.

Absolutely nothing found of any form of manipulation, of hiding and burying anything.

Not inclusive of defence papers = Not included by his defence.

Sandra Lean has already put out her speech, has she not, that should Luke Mitchell be shown to be guilty by a review (that ship has sailed), translated to, should we be exposed as with other cases?, then one takes no responsibility for anything, what can possibly be wrong with searching for the truth? –

And always I invite Sandra Lean to respond, and I make comment freely with her ‘make of it what you will’..

Link to Part 129 here