[Josy]

Channel 5 aired a documentary over 2 nights questioning whether the real killer of teenager Jodi Jones was brought to justice.

(For anyone not familiar with the case, Jodi was brutally murdered in woods near Midlothian in Scotland 18 years ago and her boyfriend Luke Mitchell who was 14 at the time of the murder was convicted for the crime)

I thought we could have a thread in here for anyone that watched to discuss their thoughts on this case.

When this happened all those years ago I immediately thought wow guilty right off the bat, evil little **** etc etc, I'm not saying I now believe 100% he is innocent or guilty but after watching the documentary and seeing how he was mistreated at 14 years old, lack of evidence, no DNA evidence tying Luke to murder at all, behaviour from the police and of course how the vultures in the media had him painted as guilty straight from the off (why on earth where they even allowed to print a 14 year olds name :/ ) I do think there was no way it could have been a fair trial with a jury finding him guilty without any reasonable doubt and that he deserves at the very least a retrial.

[arista]

[Over £1,000 raised for mother of Jodi Jones murderer Luke Mitchell

Two fundraising pages have been set up for Corinne Mitchell
after a documentary aired this week that revisits the case]

https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news...-jodi-19918926


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Jodi_Jones

[Cherie]

Will give it a watch

[Ammi]

...I don’t know if we’re spoilering ..?..I watched the first episode last night, I could only see one episode, but maybe I missed the other one...hmmmm, I don’t know what to think and I hadn’t heard of this before...am incredibly brutal murder...

Spoiler:

...so many sentences that don’t feel severe enough to fit the crime but with this...?...20yrs minimum to be served with only circumstantial evidence...?..I mean, it seemed that all there was is that they said that they thought he had purposefully led them to Jodi’s body, therefore he must be her killer because only the killer would know....and I can see the suspicion there but because he had his dog with him, it was also plausible that the dog had smelled Jodi’s scent and led him to her body...so with that, which could have gone to explain, then surely more evidence would have had to have been there that wasn’t ‘circumstantial’ ...his life was also about to be taken away in an entirely different way to poor Jodi...which was right if he had taken hers but there seemed such a lack of more conclusive evidence to say that he had for a crime so serious as this ....I so felt for his mum in all of this as well to the beginning but then hmmmmm....


...so, so strange that there was DNA at the scene, lots of DNA but not one bit that was Luke’s DNA...with such an horrific crime with so much blood etc, no blood etc on him also...I think that the DNA from Jodi’s sister’s boyfriend was innocent because Jodi had been wearing her sister’s t-shirt...I thought that was going to be solved straight away...but yeah, easily explainable ...but the used condom would surely show that another person had been there and surely enough to cast doubt ...more doubt than evidence seemed to be how it was...?...and when they found that other linked person accidentally when taking their DNA and putting it through the system...?...did they ever link that person to living in the area or having been there at any time ...?...

...anyways, an horrific and brutal murder such as that, I would have thought would indicate such anger and rage, that surely would have displayed in someone’s behaviour in the past, but not necessarily either, I guess..and his mum did lie to give him an alibi..and his brother said that he wasn’t where Luke said he was...and no emotion showing when her body was found with the most shocking of injuries she had sustained and in a village where nothing ever happened, type thing...nothing else out of the ordinary or no one else acting in any way suspiciously etc and no blood on anyone else...but there wasn’t on Luke either ...so again, all circumstantial I know and a shock reaction wouldn’t always be the same..


...anyway, as much as it was all circumstantial evidence...there was some very weighty circumstantial evidence..his knife that was never found and that he specifically said that he could imagine himself being stoned and killing someone and that he knew the best way to slit someone’s throat..the inscription he’d put on his knife pouch of Jodi’s initials and birth and death dates...I mean, that’s really odd and doesn’t sit right at all....his jacket that was never found but that he wore regularly but didn’t seem to have an explanation for where it could be, even though he always wore it and had been seen recently wearing it...and that there had been recent burning in his garden...his buying that book a few days later that showed some graphic things of the Black Dahlia murder....so much circumstantial...and she was going to meet him and sightings of them together, even though from a distance...and although I really felt for his mum, she was quite suspicious as well in that she obviously gave him an alibi but was that also because she absolutely knew it was him ...she bought him a new knife just after...I mean, really..?..he was being suspected of slashing someone to death and she replaced a knife that had gone missing and she also quickly replaced his coat that he wore regularly and was being thought as purposefully destroyed because of evidence of Jodi’s killing on it....she may have absolutely tried to cover up for him...I so don’t know what to think with this...

[Niamh.]

Thanks for the link Ammi. That's so weird actually I was on FB about a half hour ago and I saw Lee talking about this case, I hadn't heard of it so I googled a bit about it. Where can you watch the Documentary Josy/Ammi?

[Ammi]

..do you get Channel 5 in Cork...?...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..do you get Channel 5 in Cork...?...

Yeah just seen it's on Channel 5. When was the first episode aired? I can go back 1 week

[Niamh.]

Looks like they had take down the second episodes because they named other suspects?

https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news...moved-19932648

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Looks like they had take down the second episodes because they named other suspects?

https://www.edinburghlive.co.uk/news...moved-19932648

Oh I wondered where it was

Shame, I do feel there was an element that Luke didn’t fit social norms in his arrest

That there was no DNA evidence to link him to the crime is strange to say the least

[Ammi]

..I posted in the movie club thread, I somehow found myself there instead of here...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Ammi

..I posted in the movie club thread, I somehow found myself there instead of here...

I've moved it in here

[Cherie]

Also I don’t know how they got away with naming someone at the end of ep 1

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Yeah, I'm actually surprised after watching so many true story films/documentaries lately of all the crazy stuff that I hadn't actually heard of that really happened

...oh..so that’s it then and the case won’t be reviewed etc...I was undecided after the first episode and wondered if he would get a case review...


...sorry, this was meant to be in the other thread, I don’t know what happened and how I got here...

[Josy]

They took down episode 2 because Jodis brothers name showed up on the suspect list on screen for a few seconds

It can still be watched on YouTube though

[Josy]

I'm not really sure of the reasons for him being institutionalized obviously theres a lot of rumours flying around online from people that live in the area and know all involved but we all know what gossip can be like lol

I think ch5 are removing that small part then putting the second part back on.

I think due to the way he was treated by the police and media at the time, given his age aswell as the circumstantial evidence and other suspects not being followed up etc the at the very least Luke should get a retrial.

[Ammi]

...yeah, it’s quite amazing that he could have been given a sentence of a minimum of 20yrs to be served with only circumstantial evidence...that’s actually pretty terrifying, when you think...

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...yeah, it’s quite amazing that he could have been given a sentence of a minimum of 20yrs to be served with only circumstantial evidence...that’s actually pretty terrifying, when you think...

Definitely scary :/

He could have potentially been out by now if he admitted guilt but said he wont ever admit to it as he never done it.

I'm actually so undecided but would like to know the true person had been put away for it because Jodi deserves justice especially with how horrific a crime it was.

[Ammi]

Originally Posted by Josy

Definitely scary :/

He could have potentially been out by now if he admitted guilt but said he wont ever admit to it as he never done it.

I'm actually so undecided but would like to know the true person had been put away for it because Jodi deserves justice especially with how horrific a crime it was.

...yeah, that’s the thing as well...the thought that someone who could have done anything so horrific as that, could not have faced any justice...With such a violent rage crime like that, though...would they not have killed again, is what my thoughts are as well...it does t feel as though it would be a ‘one off’ crime...

[Ammi]

...it’s also difficult because if Luke did kill her...everyone would have felt, really..?...only twenty years and he’ll still have so much life to live when he’s released ...

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Josy

Definitely scary :/

He could have potentially been out by now if he admitted guilt but said he wont ever admit to it as he never done it.

I'm actually so undecided but would like to know the true person had been put away for it because Jodi deserves justice especially with how horrific a crime it was.

This is the thing I can never understand about these cases, you know if it was your loved one who had died surely you would want the right person punished not just any person.

I'm saying this in general of course because I haven't watched the documentary and I don't know anything about the case. I will try to find it on youtube though

[Ammi]

....just about half way through the 2nd part and now leaning toward him being innocent...

Spoiler:

...words really do have such weight with their meaning and how they’re used...when Luke was led from the court and it was said that he didn’t show a flicker of emotion...?...we only saw that small glimpse of him as he was led into the police van...but even with that small glimpse, what I saw was someone who seemed in total shock and completely stunned and almost being ‘dragged’ by the officer, really...he just seemed quite motionless, but his legs still walking and going through those motions all on their own...one thing that I really didn’t agree with, which is I guess, a by the by...was when it was said that if Luke was innocent then society had done something dreadful and that we need to take a look at ourselves...but it would be the police and justice system who would have done something dreadful and would have to look at theirselves, surely...?..not an outer society...

...I’m still conflicted in that I can see how difficult/unlikely it would have been for Luke to have walked all of the way home without being seen and there would have been so much blood on him...?...but then, that would be the same for anyone locally...so someone who wasn’t local to the area and a stranger to Jodi...?....

...I agree with Josy about the reconstruction, it achieved nothing and was just annoying...how could someone focusing on driving, be a reliable witness for the few seconds it would take to pass...I mean, if she could identify Luke then she was surely driving without due care and attention...?...it was such a narrow glimpse of them and she really had to be led into looking for them in the reconstruction anyway, it took three attempts and directly leading her, more or less....but as was said as well...the case had been huge and the court case had been huge with Luke’s image everywhere for 19 months ...so why didn’t she then say that she couldn’t and wouldn’t identify him in court...why use that time up in court in calling her up as a witness... or why did she not tell them it was pointless her going to court...that didn’t make sense...

...The moped boys have just been mentioned so I haven’t watched much about them yet but already that feels odd and suspicious...when it was asked for anyone who was in that area at the time of her murder to contact them ...?...her own cousin took 5 days to come forward, when his moped had been seen at that very time of the killing....