*Guest Blog*

And again, we are back to the point – You are putting out what was far from the reality of the evidence, this simple application of lying about age, it had absolutely nothing to do with lying about his age, nor of him getting any tattoo! 

That false narrative on repeat – The evidence. Corinne Mitchell was asked about using false ID and she denied this, she lied that this had happened. She said none had been asked for, only his age. To, what if I told you the mans name, and again it was no, the man was in his 50’s. Missing the whole point, this of course after Donald Findlay had a fit of producing evidence from the staff. 

Of the book, that ID given of a man, a family friend, of altered ID to have a date of birth of a younger person. To show the court how easily the woman would lie under oath to protect her son. That there was no way that the staff made that name up, they did not know the Mitchells nor the name of their friend. 

So, not even a good try, bar those who soak any old nonsense up of course. It had nothing to do with allowing her son a tattoo, trivial, nor indeed of using fake ID, it was only around lying under oath, of denying that they had produced this fake ID under the name of a family friend – Caught red handed! 

As we had with the knife, shall we have that again? In that station and asked about the new knife that had been purchased, the police wanted to know where it was, no idea was the claim, could not remember any knife or where it was. For it was not in the house whilst being searched. Leaving the station, discussion with lawyer and so forth, one again had the most amazing memory recall, they located the knife from its hiding place (perhaps it was with the other one, who knows?) and gave it to Beaumont. 

To evidence, the search team, the pictures taken of that search. No bag with any knife in it, as she tried to claim, that they had missed it, nope not true, evidence already heard. Of her having no idea of any knife nor of where it was. To miraculously locate it and claim it had been hidden for camping in winter.

To Shane Mitchell and being told that he had of course told the truth, caught red handed again, of turning ones face away and told about a “petulant child” the actions of one when being found out repeatedly! to not being truthful, of caught doing wrong. 

So, this false narrative by manipulators and liars, who do this across the board, where Sandra Lean, to those a little lacking, attempts to apply that the new knife had the police attempt to place it as the murder weapon, again that deception – The only knife placed as missing and still missing is a Brown handled Skunting knife. 

To Jodi’s mother, the other half of this “Two Mothers” and again, manipulators and liars who put out a false narrative, attempt many illogical points that have no bearing in the slightest about testimony under oath. Sandra Lean tells us from statements of some cancelled appointment, which was told to the police as it is in the statements. Which again shows honesty and not deception. That whilst one had cancelled an appointment (not interested in those who lie and manipulate at will) without showing from statements what reason was given to the doctor. Where it would appear that the doctor via the son and/or mother made it clear to them of any cannabis use. 

That in a murder investigation the family told truth and not lies to the police, of that cancelled appointment, of the cannabis use – And this has what bearing exactly upon lying under oath? I do wonder at points if you actually realise what you are saying? You are highlighting repeatedly honesty to the police in a murder investigation from Jodi’s family. 

Yet over ride every lie told to the police by the Mitchells? Along with lying under oath, and again putting out a false narrative around what the actual evidence was about?  

(Original forum post here)

*Guest Blog*

How far down from the V break in the wall had that poor girls body been hidden – 43ft.
Had she been moved back from the wall – Yes, to behind that “Large Oak tree” that Mitchell described to the police. 
Did he tell the police that they had all walked some distance past the V break – Yes he did. 
Did he draw a map for the police – Yes he did. 
Did he place X’s upon that map of location of everyone? – Yes he did. 
Did he then tell the police whilst discussing his map that the dog reacted “parallel to” where Jodi lay in the woods? – Yes he did. 
Did his mother try to avoid that map like the plague when questioned about it on forums – Yes she did, opting to say that Luke “vaguely” remembered something of a map. 
Were the search party taken back separately to that path to go over the evenings events? – Yes they were.
Was this the point of the statements being clarified? – Yes it was. 
What was the change, the clarification from the search trio? – That it was Luke Mitchell leading his dog and not the dog leading Luke Mitchell. 
Did they change where the dog with Luke Mitchell made for? – No they did not. 
Did they change dog and wall – No they did not. 
Where on that path did they give these description of that dog and wall – At the V break, it was always at the V break. 
How do we know this – For every single thing they described was of this. Directly to, watching Luke Mitchell climb over. Seeing the lead being handed to Alice Walker. Seeing his torchlight shine left. Being stationary at the wall briefly whilst he entered those woods. Then of Janine Jones and Steven Kelly walking further down that path.
Was Luke Mitchell lying – Yes he was. 
Had they all been some 43ft down – No they had not.
Was his dog then alerting to something on the other side of that wall – No, for he was lying. 
Did he have to make his way back to any break in the wall – No, for he was lying.
How far had Janine Jones and Steven Kelly said they had walked before hasting back to that break – Around 10-15ft. 
Where was Luke Mitchell’s voice coming from – Behind them. 
Where was Luke Mitchell when they arrived back to that break – On the other side.
How far then could Luke Mitchell have only travelled down that narrow passage – Around 10ft and stop.
Were the calls to the emergency services played before that court room – Yes they were. 
Has you alter ego’s head ever had possession of those recordings – No she has not, tells us that she has seen the transcript only and the operators comments. 

What was shown before that court around “the boyfriend” the “laddie in a right state” – That it was Steven Kelly who was speaking at those moments, screaming down the phone. 

Was Luke Mitchell ever in a “right state?” – No, not for a moment. 

What were those comments around the dog and wall at the V break? – It was “pulling below the V” directly under it. “scurrying in the undergrowth” Then standing up against the wall “it’s head was level with the V” – It was also “jumping” up at the wall looking for its master as he went over into those woods – So, tell me Faith, why do you assume that Luke Mitchell did NOT take his dog with him over that wall, the dog who was supposed to have scented something beyond into the darkness of that woodland? – Behave.

(Original forum post here)

Link to Part 158 here

*Guest Blog*

Whilst your analytical skills are nil and void, I didn’t realise being unable to count was also a problem. I’ll put the list up with the addition and you tell me where the lies are? Or has you head become so far removed from the bog standard basics of knowledge in this case you use that predictive ‘lies’ simply to point to your ilk – Don’t listen! 

What time did Luke Mitchell tell Jodi’s mother he had not seen her? – Just after 10:40pm in response to her text. 
What time did he say he would be off to the RDP (Roans Dyke path) to search – 10:50pm.
What is the time difference? – Just under 10mins. 
What time did he tell Judith Jones he was on/at path with dog – 10:59pm. 
What did he tell the police took place between those two calls – Debating with mother, borrowing a torch of brother, ready and on that path. 
How long is walk to path from his house, the normal route – 7mins. 
What are the time factors here? – In and around 8mins.

What phone was called several times to communicate with Alice Walker before 11pm – Her landline. 
When did this switch to mobile contact – After 11pm. 
Where were the three people from Mayfield at 11:18pm – In the complex. 
Who’s company were they not in with that call – Luke Mitchell’s.
How long now had he been on that path by his information handed over – 18mins. 
How long does it take to walk that path from bottom to top – 11mins. 
What time did the they catch sight of each other by torchlight – No earlier than 11:20pm
How long had Luke Mitchell now been on that path – 20mins.
What were Alice Walker’s first words to Luke Mitchell – “Is that you Luke?” (undisputed by all four)
Why did she shout out that question? – Because she knew he was on the path and heading there to search it because of this.
What did Luke Mitchell ask them? – Had they brought anything of Jodi’s along.
Why did he ask that question? – For he had told Jodi’s mother he had his dog, he expected them to have taken something for the dog to scent with.
What were all four people aware of? – That Luke Mitchell was on that path, that they were going to be searching that path because of him.
Where was Luke Mitchell when they walked down to physically be in his company – Around 3/4
How long from the top to the V break in the wall – Around 6 1/2 mins
How long from where they set off together – Around 5mins. 
What did Luke Mitchell have a hold of his dog with – A short lead attached to a harness – pop a picture up, surely you have at least that?
Who took front spot – Luke Mitchell.
Where did he instantly make a bee line for?  – The “Gino break” in the wall.
Where did he go then – back in front
Where did he go then – A few steps into the verge on the field side.
Where did he go then – back in front
Where did he got then – To the V break in that wall. 

What are the time factors once more until he was shouting out of his something in that woods – In and around 8mins.

So, in and around 16mins in total he had within 10mins of telling Jodi’s mother he had not seen her, instantly made a bee line to the RDP and nowhere else to search.  Upon setting off together he made a bee line for that wall, diverting the search, the notion of finding anything upon it to that woodland beyond that wall. 

I am not interested in the the scraping to try and make a liars lies fit. The times do not lie, they cannot be altered. And every part of when that trio left Mayfield to going to that path is backed to the hilt with proof. At least 20mins on that path, IF he was telling the truth at 10:59pm. –

So by all means say it is all lies, I couldn’t agree more, he did nothing but lie, didn’t he now?

(Link to forum post here)

Link to Part 157 here

*Guest Blog*

The walk from the top of the path (east to west) is around 6 1/2 mins alone to that V break in the wall, we know that Luke Mitchell was shouting out from that woodland strip no later than 11:30pm which is placed as an approx: time.

Everything that Luke Mitchell was to claim happened was shown to be impossible, both in time and by the very information given by the other three from those very first statements. 

That sense of real time no doubt warped for them all, with Luke Mitchell fuelling the police with a series of events that simply did not fit into time.

Not just that they did not fit into time but they were in complete contrast to what three other people were saying. 

I mentioned no later than 11:30pm for him to be shouting out from that woodland, the time from the top of the path to the V break, it was in all probability sooner that this.

The walking distance shorter.

Sandra Lean refers to this “slow pace” it was not a slow pace, it was a “slower pace” than that walked to get to the path itself.

Not much chance of a slow pace with Luke Mitchell taken the lead at all points.

An even pace directly to those points, the Gino break, in front, those few steps into the field, back in front and directly to that V break in the wall. 

For this we need to work backwards to show real time here –

11:34pm and that call is placed to the emergency services, in that call played before a court room, those harrowing screams from Jodi’s gran and sister, placed whilst Alice Walker had just come across that horror.

The evidence of her screams setting that of Janine Jones off from that path, that natural reaction to hearing that horror from her poor grandmother. 

This 43ft distance down the inside of that wall, the time to be helped over that V break, that briefest of times with her grandchild, and we are in real time talking no more than around 3mins.

The time for Steven Kelly to be over to walk no more than 30ft down the inside of that wall, let us give a full 5 mins here for both and we are back to just before 11:30pm with Luke Mitchell shouting out from that woodland, and as we know, he had taken only around 10 steps and stopped. 

For, after he had entered those woods and turned left, then Janine Jones and Steven Kelly continued the walk, going past that V break.

In their evidence from the off, they had walked around 10-15ft past when Luke Mitchell shouted out, his voice behind them. Hasting back those few feet and Luke Mitchell was standing on the other side of that break once again.

He had barely moved. 

Yet he was to describe the tree by name that Jodi lay behind.

He was to describe Jodi’s clothing even though she had changed.

Her shoes and that distinct hair bobble that was not visible at all, tangled out of sight.

16mins which is barely enough time for anyone to even talk about a physical search.

But to not only initiate one, to be physically in that location.

To set off together and be shouting out from woodland that no one had been in searching with any dog.

Fuelled with lies by Luke Mitchell of events that did NOT take place, there had been no “some distance past not even 20yards” to being narrowed down to exactly 43ft and “parallel to” where he had left Jodi hidden in that woodland, through that undergrowth, over that high, thick, dry stone dyke. –

16mins of special knowledge, topped off with describing everything he could NOT have seen from that brief distance covered in those woods. 

To tell the police he had never been in there before yet made a bee line directly to there and to that first break.

To tell the police he had never seen those breaks before until that evening, finding that first one instantly some 7ft from ground level. –

He just kept on lying ———–

(Original forum post here)

Link to Part 156 here

*Guest Blog*

These enablers of a violent killer, who lie repeatedly for him, on behalf of him.

Are under no illusion of the happenings that evening fully led by Luke Mitchell.

To divert away from those 16mins you will find them scraping with Alice Walker wanting to search the path?

Let us have a look at this feeble attempt to deflect from Luke Mitchells 16mins of special knowledge.

Central belt of communication, mainly Jodi’s mother. Who had repeatedly spoken with Luke Mitchell and with her own mother, all calls to Alice Walker (Jodi’s gran) were made to her landline until after they left her home, shortly after 11pm, the calls then changing to mobile contact.

Headed to the RDP (Roans Dyke path) to search by the initiation of Luke Mitchell, of him being on the RDP. 

When they arrived at the top of that path around 11:20pm each saw the others torchlight, and Alice Walker shouted out “Is that you Luke?”

Contrary to the lies being put out, they then walked down to physically be in his company.

He had only been around 2/3 up when seen, around 3/4 when physically together.

It does not take much when Luke Mitchell instantly asked if they had brought anything of Jodi’s along with them.

Everything again clearly showing why the meeting was taken place upon that path. 

Back to Luke Mitchell for a moment here.

He was either lying of being on that path by 11pm to only be 2/3 of the way up, it is an 11min walk from one end to the next on average.

Or he was simply idling time until he saw their arrival by torchlight for he knew as did they, without any doubt one was on the path and the others were heading there to meet with him.

This 2/3 to 3/4 of not being at the top, of Luke Mitchell asking for something of Jodi’s for the prop to scent with, they had not taken anything and Alice Walker said to search without it.

For the four of them to carry out what they were there for, what they had been led there to do, which was to search that path and verges.

As we know, by Luke Mitchells claims, that Jodi had failed to turn up Newbattle earlier.

This deflection does NOT change Luke Mitchell’s actions nor that time scale, and it is this that we are highlighting here –

Those 16mins in total which were fully led by Luke Mitchell.

(Original forum post here)

Link to Part 155 here

*Guest Blog*

Another dose of reality –

16mins from start to finish, a series of events acted out by Luke Mitchell.

This is the time of that miraculous discovery of his girlfriend.

16mins of special knowledge from where he had left her body hidden some hours earlier –

16mins. And one wonders why Luke Mitchell is still spending his life tariff in jail?

Of why he became prime suspect and subsequently convicted –

16mins. 

Luke Mitchell earlier in the evening of June the 30th had moved his girlfriends body from the back of the wall and hidden her behind a large oak tree with masses of foliage blocking view, summer growth at its fullest.

In a woodland strip some 43ft west of the infamous V break in a wall. That high, thick, dry stone dyke.

A frenzied violent attack covering a much larger area, starting NW of that V break and finishing those 43ft west directly behind that wall. 

This 16mins is split into two periods of in and around 8mins each.

That first period starts from just after 10:50pm when he was speaking with Jodi’s mother on the phone, in under 10mins from telling her he had not seen Jodi he had instantly initiated an actual physical search, one directly to the path (Roansdyke Path).

By 10:59pm, when speaking with Jodi’s mother again, he tells her he is on/at the path.

Yet he was also to claim of having a debate with his mother, of having to borrow a torch from his brother. Shane Mitchell he said was upstairs, that he in turn had to locate a torch from somewhere downstairs, to be out that door and on that path.

The walk alone, the normal route, around 7mins. In and around 8mins he had achieved all of this. We can leave Shane Mitchell not being home at this point, it is also highly unlikely that Luke Mitchell himself was home either. It matters not for that 8min time period here. 

The next period of in and around 8mins starts from approx:

11:22pm when four people met together on that path, there at the path by direction of Luke Mitchell, fully led by him, his instant initiation of an actual physical search directly to that path.

The woodland strip cut off from the path by 4-10ft of undergrowth, then that high, thick, dry stone dyke.

The wall itself has two breaks, one the “Gino” break, the stones knocked off its length on top, still a good 7ft from ground level. The next the infamous V break in that wall.

The physical meeting taken place near to that first break the “Gino” break. Between there and the start/top of the path. 

It is important to note and make abundantly clear here that Luke Mitchell’s dog was on a short lead attached to a harness, it was at all times under control of its master.

That these four people with that dog at no point were in that woodland strip searching, they were on that path, there under the guise of searching the path and the verges to the side. Led there to do this by Luke Mitchell. 

As soon as they commenced that walk together Luke Mitchell diverted from that path and made a bee line directly to the first break in the wall, the “Gino” break.

Through several feet of undergrowth, up the wall and shone his torch rapidly into the darkness beyond that wall. So, from instantly initiating an actual physical search to that path, he then instantly initiated the notion of that woodland beyond that wall as a viable place to find something.

To take his dog back in front again, lead it a few feet into the verge of the field side and hasted back in front with the dog again. And as with that first break he made a bee line for the V break, directly to it heading from the east.

This time Luke Mitchell climbed over and walked no more than 10ft down a narrow passage on the inside of that wall, shouting out he had found his something. 

16mins in total split into two lots of in and around 8mins.

To initiate an actual physical search, to be ready and walk the distance to that path. A search directly to there. To meet with the others and instantly initiate the notion of that woodland as viable to find something, diverting attention away from that path. To enter that woodland and find his something –

16mins. 

And you should be shaking your head here, 16mins to find a body hidden in an area of woodland off the beaten track, a body that had lay undiscovered over the course of that evening.

Not 16mins of searching, 16mins in total.

Of no one being in that woodland searching, no dog roaming free and scenting in any woodland.

16mins in total fully led there by Luke Mitchell and led into the notion of that woodland by Luke Mitchell instantly diverting from that path. That had absolutely nothing to do with Luke Mitchells dog, fully under the control of Luke Mitchell at all times on that short lead attached to its harness. 

The evidence led around this alone was outstanding. Luke Mitchell had claimed to hang around for the best part of 90mins earlier in the evening in one given area, around a five minute walk from the start of that path, yet his search in record breaking time was directly to that path then directly to that woodland strip beyond that wall. 

So, we have a lad that had no alibi.

We had five people seeing Luke Mitchell in places he claimed not to have been.

We had no one seeing him at those times where he attempted to claim to have been.

We had this ridiculous 90mins of claimed idling in one spot waiting without being seen bar that intentional window of opportunity, of placing himself there to be seen, from around 6pm until just after 6:15pm.

Not seen again outwith those three people who saw him further up Newbattle Road, at the gate and exiting that woodland strip before making his way down to the entrance of that estate, for his intentional window of opportunity. 

A lad who took himself away from home to be in the boys company in the Abbey, who chased them up not once but twice for that meet to take place.

Who claimed to go directly home at 9pm and stay home, he had not, he was seen going home at 10pm, Jodi’s curfew time. Who claimed to be home at 10:50pm borrowing torches with no brother home?

Who in 16mins of his actions led Jodi’s family directly to her body. 

That total time frame for that poor girls family.

To be told just after 10:40pm that Jodi was missing, that he had not seen her that evening.

To have him instantly bring about an actual physical search.

To have the police arrive at their house to only file a missing persons report and a call coming through that a body had been found.

By 11:30pm Luke Mitchell is shouting from that woodland, at 11:34pm he put that call through in his flat affect tones that he had found something ————

“Lured” is the word being used just now by Luke Mitchell’s enablers, of Jodi’s family “luring Luke Mitchell to the path ———-” –

16mins of Luke Mitchells actions and no one else’s. 

Those first statements –

Four people with three given those descriptions of Luke Mitchell and his dog going directly to that “Gino” break and Luke Mitchell omitting this.

To then go with his dog directly to that V break, with Luke Mitchell claiming it was some distance past.

The police fully aware of those time scales, who arrived at that scene, that horror, of where that poor girls body was hidden –

And you think a policeman said to have written something down wrong produced this claimed tunnel vision? –

16mins fully led by Luke Mitchell.

Absolutely nothing to do with his dog other than it being used as a prop. –

16mins.

(Original forum post here)

Link to Part 154 here

On the 31st of January 2005 Colin Bowman stated on an Internet forum regarding guilty killer Luke Mitchell;

Has anyone entertained the notion that he might be innocent?
Or, if not convinced of his innocence, been concerned by the nature of his prosecution?

In March 2005 Colin Bowman who also went by the pseudonym bobbiedog went on to set up an Internet forum called Luke Mitchell Fact and Myth’;

Colin Bowman in mentioned in the following blogs which can be read by tapping on each link;

The Truth Behind Killer Simon Hall & His Enablers #InnocenceFraud Phenomenon Scam

Toxic Abuser & Pretend Criminologist Sandra Lean’s 19 Year HOAX PR Campaign & The Innocence Fraud Phenomenon Gravy Train Scam of Psychopathic Killer Luke Mitchell

The following was published by un-convicted baby killer Billy Middleton on the 23rd of November 2010 on the WAP website and had been written by Sandra Lean

It has been reproduced below for study and educational purposes

………………………………………………………………………………………

ADMINISTRATORS NOTE: I HAVE BEEN SENT THE FOLLOWING BY SANDRA AT 20:59 

It is with extreme sadness and regret that I am making this post, but the events of this afternoon have left me with no choice. Whether people accept it or not, posts on internet sites have real life consequences.

Almost two months ago, at the beginning of October, Stephanie requested that Simon’s caseblog be closed, pending the appeal. I explained at the time, on the forum, that this is quite common practice in the run up to an appeal.  At that time, there were also discussions regarding taking down all facebook related content connected with Simon’s case (which Wrongly Accused Person had no connection with whatsoever) as Stephanie felt she was being attacked from many angles. The forum at Wrongly Accused was not one of the places this was happening.

Stephanie was happy with this arrangement at the time, and posted to that effect on the forum.

It was confirmed on October 3rd that Billy had closed Simon’s caseblog, and put up a message stating that this was pending the appeal. For reasons which will become clear, however, he advised Stephanie that he would be writing to Simon asking him to confirm future changes, etc, to the site. 

The following series of events covers recent claims about the closing of the site:

November 17th at 12.52: an email was received at Wrongly Accused, addressed to Billy, which began, “Dear Billy, you may or may not have received a letter from Simon requesting that his site be taken down from Wrongly Accused.” It goes on, “We ask that you please remove all content relating to Simon’s case, and that the thread on the wrongly accused be locked.”

November 18th at 15:40 (less than 27 hours later) another email was received stating that Billy “appeared to be ignoring emails.” A facebook post was also made, on Stephanie’s behalf, asking that Billy read his “private emails.”

November 19th 10.48am: a request was made to let Stephanie know if Simon’s letter had been received, and on November 20th, it was confirmed that it had not yet been.

November 20th  at 10.04am: Stephanie posted on the forum “Simon has been asking for over a week to have his caseblog closed down completely and for this thread to be locked.” This post was less than 72 hours after the initial email regarding a letter Billy “may or may not have received.”  

November 21st:The  post was re-posted on the McKie site 

November 22nd, at 1.09 (which is 12.09, real time): Stephanie posted “After two weeks of Billy ignoring Simon’s express wishes and requests…..” (this was 5 days after the initial contact.)

November 22nd at 6.12pm (5 hours after the above post) an email was received at Wrongly Accused from Stephanie as follows: “It would appear you have received Simon’s letter. Therefore, please remove entirely his caseblog. I think you will find, if he asked for a message to be put up, he meant within the thread, bearing in mind he is in prison and does not understand how it all works. We wish the site to no longer be found in a search, it’s that simple.”

This was the first reference to the site “no longer being found in a search.”

However, Simon’s letter had, indeed, been received by then, and a clear difficulty had arisen. It would be both unethical and unprofessional to post the letter in its entirety without Simon’s permission, but the pertinent parts state the following:

“I understand the website is closed pending appeal but other bits relating to the site are open. Is that right? If so, please stop everything to do with my case, and that includes forums, walls or whatever else people insult each other on. Also, could you change the “closed pending appeal” to the following:

“In the interests of justice and pending Mr Hall’s forthcoming appeal, this website is temporarily closed. Simon would like to thank everyone for their support and their continued interest in his case.”

We were faced with a dilemma – Simon’s letter does not talk about taking everything down, or making his case unable to be found in a search – indeed, he is quite clear that he wants a message displayed on his site, and has included the word “temporarily,” which did not feature before. He asks that everything be “stopped.” The caseblog had been closed since early October, and the forum was locked on November 21st, so Simon’s requests had already been dealt with.

Stephanie’s requests, on the other hand, had changed, and continued to change, from closing the site, to taking everything down completely, to ensuring nothing could be found in a web search (something, incidentally, we could not guarantee, even if we took the entire site down.) Even her last email is unclear – how could a message from Simon be posted in “a thread” if the forum had also been removed? 

The disingenuous portrayal of delay, posted publicly within 72 hours, was deeply concerning, as there had been previous instances of such behaviour.

Between October 2nd and October 4th, at a time where I was extremely busy, I had received 20 emails from Stephanie, between private messages and those which had come through wrongly accused, along with a number of texts. I had not had time to respond to these, but Stephanie concluded that I was “ignoring” her.

I wrote a long email on October 4th, explaining the circumstances. Part of that email, however, referred to a post Stephanie had put on the Wrongly Accused forum meantime, in her belief that I was ignoring her.  (Note this is only a 48 hour period.) I wrote, “I’m also interested in why you chose to use my facebook post (adapted) to post on wrongly accused. Following from Shirley’s post as it does, it makes it look like one of the “un-named” individuals is me. I have never attacked you, criticised you or made any other negative comment about you anywhere – I may simply be reading too much into it, but that is certainly how it came across.”

Stephanie responded:“….yes, I did use your post on facebook on the wrongly accused, and when I did I knew you would be more annoyed over that than you are about what I am going through at the moment. And I have a couple of friends that will verify that. “

I was extremely concerned at this, as it appeared that Stephanie was happy to have me painted in a dishonest light, simply because I had not responded immediately to her emails. Other things going on behind the scenes had alerted me to the possibility that Stephanie was not being entirely straight with me.

The next difficulty arose over the claims that outsider/smiffy was Billy. John Lamberton was posting some pretty damning claims about things Stephanie had purportedly told him. Worried that these claims might reflect badly on Stephanie, I attempted to pre-empt further claims by suggesting a possible source of John’s assumption that outsider/smiffy was Billy. Stephanie immediately PM’d me and emailed me, but before I had even had a chance to read her messages, and respond, she had posted on the forum claiming that my post was “untrue.” I emailed Stephanie privately, although she continued to post. Part of my last message, on November 15th  was, “Before I had had a chance to respond to your messages, you were posting that what I had said was “untrue.” By the time I had clarified the situation, you were still claiming in your emails that what I had said was “untrue.” It seems to me you simply did not understand, or chose not to believe, what I was saying. There’s nothing I can do about that – what hurts is that you could not step back, knowing me as I thought you did, and ask yourself, is there perhaps another explanation for this. Nope, instant public condemnation, in the belief that you were being attacked, when, in fact, I was trying to defend you.”

I finished this email by saying, “I can only finish by saying that I am truly heart-broken at how these events have panned out. That your words are being used to paint me as dishonest and unreliable, and that in turn is being used to undermine Luke’s case, is probably one of the worst experiences in all of this. I thought you were my friend.”

On both of these occasions, Stephanie had made public accusations, apparently without any thought of consequence, and was doing so again regarding the closing/removal of Simon’s site.

We had decided that the best course of action would be to ignore the public accusations and write to Simon for further clarification, however this evening’s events have forced a decision based on other factors.

Entering a local store this evening, I was approached by a man who greeted me with the following:

 “You are one f*cking sick little bitch. How long did you think folk were going to take your lies and p*sh? Weren’t happy destroying one family’s life, eh? Now you’ve started on somebody else’s. How many more you twisted little f*ck? Yours is coming, don’t you worry about it. You’ll get yours you twisted little c**t – there’s plenty just waiting their chance.”

I assume this came about as a result of various claims being made on various websites. In principle, I would not back down to such bullying and threatening behaviour. However, I have to live here, as do my family, and in view of the fact that Simon’s appeal is imminent, it is with a very heavy heart that I have asked Billy to remove everything relating to Simon’s case from the site.

I would emphasise wholeheartedly that my support for Simon and Stephanie is unwavering, and I hope with all my heart that the appeal is successful, and they are able to begin to build their life together, as they should be.

*Guest Blog*

There is NO counter argument at all, not even a snifter of one.

Another feeble attempt by Luke Mitchell’s defence –

Always good to have a refresher around this claimed comparison to debate.

Luke Mitchell eventually, after changes had to be made. Is on Newbattle Road (claimed) for the best part of 90 minutes.

The claim is of waiting and looking out for Jodi. He had claimed to be walking out to meet with her, he did not get very far.

The lad is twiddling his thumbs doing nothing for around 90 minutes.

Time is dragging and dragging.

He placed a call to his mother, the claim was to ask If Jodi had been to the house. 

Two slips happened here whilst trying to make up any reason for that call other than the truth of course.

That the girl somehow got past him whilst he was looking out for her, that he also knew his mother was in the garden still. On that miserable night, idling her time in the garden it is claimed enjoying the fresh air.

So we have an adult and the youth, now with that long passage of time, neither doing much of anything really.

None of the two are concerned, at all.

Both armed with self claimed knowledge, that of the ban on a path due to it’s “secluded” nature. That after such a long time the girl had NOT turned up in Newbattle, and he calls his mother and NOT Jodi’s mother. 

He calls the boys and he calls them back and he calls them back again, they were running slightly late.

Claims to have went directly home when he leaves them.

That upon his arrival home he claims to have asked his mother again, had Jodi been in contact.

Such an odd thing to claim, for in the earlier call he says he has told her to tell Jodi ‘they‘ would be in the Abbey, she would know where. Telepathy perhaps.

She had NOT of course arrived in the Abbey, and she had NOT of course make any contact with Luke Mitchell, nor his mother with him to ask again had Jodi been to any house.

So, the claim then is that she told him ‘not to worry, the girl would have got caught up gabbing somewhere‘

This is 3 1/2 hrs after he claimed to have left home.

An adult claiming to tell her son not to worry about a girl some 3 1/2 hrs later who had failed to turn up in Newbattle, from walking that “secluded path” –

Behave. 

10:40pm comes and there has been no meet he claims.

10:50pm and it is guns blazing, he is off like a shot, instantly places a physical search to that path.

He is gone X amount of time and his mother is trying to get a hold of him, the claim is of worry, of her son walking that “secluded path”

She did NOT of course phone Jodi’s house, the place he was supposed to be heading to after the search of that path. 

So that young girl, with no phone, no guard dog, no show, had zero concern for her, from the adult, from her son –

It is as the AD stated, there was none for she already knew that Jodi Jones was dead.

Those very first words spoken “Jodi’s dead!”

So what was it you were trying to compare this with exactly.

Jodi’s mother/father. Who were completely blindsided to ANY danger. Time passing quickly whilst busy and occupied.

Who made it clear that because there had been NO contact back from Luke Mitchell they believed the meeting had naturally taken place, wherever that was to be, of somewhere up here. No path, nothing secluded, a girl walking alone with no phone, no guard dog by her side. –

Behave!

(Original forum post here)

Link to Part 153 here