Luke Mitchell documentary

[IsurviveonCoffeeandWinein2021]

Did anyone watch tonight? I don't know much about the case originally as I was a teenager when it happened but I do remember how horrific it was and parents etc talking about it.

Was he on trial by media? The doc tonight certainly seems to be leaning that way. I think it's so coincidental it's been shown tonight when the whole Scottish institution is being questioned? I hope for Jodis family it is resolved one way or another

Totally agree Groovee, the programme was so lopsided. It must have been terrible for Jodis parents to have this in their faces.

I remember the murder when it happened (I stay in Edin) but being a lot younger at the time, didn't realise quite the extent of the brutality. And of course, being a parent now myself, feel absolutely heartbroken for Jodi and her family for their loss and heartbreak at the horrific way she was killed. So, so sad.

I do think there is a lot we are missing in the whole story. Will we ever know?

I read the court report too. Theres a lot of circumstantial evidence which is very compelling.

His distinctive knife and jacket go missing. His mother had a big fire shortly after the killing. He was able to lead the search party straight to the site of her body. He was identified by 3 witnesses as being in the place of the murder at the time of the murder. His alibhai was his mother, who doesn't seem reliable. He googled similar killings to the way Jodi was murdered two days after her death.

I found the C5 documentary odd in the way that it mentioned 4 or 5 men by name, as well as the one who obviously has taken out an interdict, with only the evidence that made them seem involved and no mention of the substantial evidence that ruled them out.

All it boils down to is the "it wiz only a young laddie" defence.

The court report also mentions that he was seeing another girl as well as Jodi, I wondered if she'd found out and challenged him and that's the evidence that they are not giving as obviously it means another young girl or maybe classmates involved?

Episode 2 seems to be back up so will watch later and see if it changes my views.

I thought that too @WaxOnFeckOff

And perhaps that’s why they can’t publish that evidence , maybe it’s statements from under 16’s?

I know the interdict stopped Jodi's family member being named. However the investigation seemed to Pin its hopes on this bloke who is dead (convenient to name a dead guy that cannot defend himself)

Rumours in the past was the R Green who was named the Di Vinci rapist.

Watching it now.

The mother does not appear well, mentally.

I just can't get away from the fact there must have been a whole heap of other evidence to convict him and quash the appeals.

It's very biased.

@FuckingHateRats

Watching it now.

The mother does not appear well, mentally.

I just can't get away from the fact there must have been a whole heap of other evidence to convict him and quash the appeals.

It's very biased.

I agree.... horribly biased and highly inflammatory... Im amazed it got aired

Detectives and other main woman were no Katherine Zellner that's for sure. Whole thing was so amateurish and they didn't seem to be the keenest of minds to be polite. What was the whole thing with getting the detectives daughter to drive round 3 times? They talked about it being a drive by at 30 mph and given that it was just after a roundabout on domestic road I would doubt that the witness was going 30mph and also she was driving a road she knew so would be more likely to notice other stuff than someone who was completely knew to the area - just some of the bollocks.

new not knew...

Yes the drive by thing was not well thought out at all.

If I was driving around my own scheme I’d be much more aware of irregularities than the girl they used that had never been there before.

I think because he never gave any sort of explanation regarding the missing knife or jacket is strange too.
Also no tears from him , his girlfriend of 5 months is dead and he does not seem upset ?
The court report evidence stated that he showed no emotion upon finding the body either , that in itself is extremely weird.

I said this to DD while I was watching (about the whole driving thing being ridiculous).

The woman clearly had 100% of her attention on the road and her focus on listening to directions. That just doesn't happen when you're driving a road in your local area that you've driven hundreds of times.

Also, I live in a similar "small town" type of place not far away, and if I saw a couple at the end of a lane / street I'd have a look - because I'd wonder if I knew them.

That was such a pointless waste of 10 minutes when they could have used that time to give is an actual timeline!!

From what I could make out from looking at the documents, the texts etc seemed to be around 4.30ish and his alibi was from when his mum got in and he was making dinner so then they seem to be looking for what happened between 5 and 10 as he seems to have a more definite alibi for this sort of timescale where he was with a friend.

The fact he had no blood on him but didn't seem clean (as in he hadn't had a shower) is a bit bothersome, but I don't reckon he went home. I think he maybe went to the caravan park.

But if he burnt his clothes and had been wearing a balaclava and gloves etc then his hair and hands wouldn't need cleaned. Loads of kids/teens have balaclavas if they've been go karting.

So therefore could quite easily have no DNA of Jodi's in his house and then a lot of the caravans were destroyed I think?

Good points @WaxOnFeckOff

@Blurberoo

*His mother burned his clothes that should read

I’ve not watched yet but going to when the DC are in bed.

I thought she was charged for that but then charges were dropped as there was no evidence?

They didn’t say in the documentary what the specific charges were against her
They skirted around anything related to Luke’s family really.

I was early 20’s at the time of this case and I certainly remember reading about the burning clothes thing. It’s stuck in my mind for years. I wonder why they didn’t have enough evidence ? Was it burnt to such ashes they could not tell ?Did she scatter the ashes after burning the jacket so they couldn’t be found ?
So so many unanswered questions

I clearly remember the accusation of her burning his jacket too, it was a big deal at the time.

Can someone tell me 2 things I missed ...

Who was the woman doing most of the talking in the interviewing and visited Lukes mother?

What was the reason given for Luke's mother living in that place with no heat or water?

The lady was an ex “ alternative therapies “ person who then studied law and done a PHD in legal studies who looked up Luke’s case as part of her study.
( so basically , not a real lawyer )

The mother said she had to sell her house , as her caravan business was burnt down and she lost everything ( presume no insurance so she had to sell to cover costs etc )

@RubyWooRed

The lady was an ex “ alternative therapies “ person who then studied law and done a PHD in legal studies who looked up Luke’s case as part of her study. ( so basically , not a real lawyer )

The mother said she had to sell her house , as her caravan business was burnt down and she lost everything ( presume no insurance so she had to sell to cover costs etc )

I thought she sold the family home so she could clear his name.

Oh was it , I suppose Donald Findlay would have cost a lot , can’t see him being free with Legal Aid.

I think part of the issue with the evidence was that the searches didn't take place straight away? - I might have misconstrued that though as the programme wasn't very clear or well constructed.

Yes , also I’m sure I’ve read or heard somewhere that the murder scene wasn’t covered and was left to the elements at the time overnight ?

Yes that’s what I remember from the time, that the crime scene was left uncovered in the rain overnight.

I wonder if because of that police blunder that no evidence could be submitted ie: forensic evidence as it was all spoiled.

Still doesn’t solve the mystery of how Luke actually had no forensic evidence on him even microscopic.

I suppose it depends how thoroughly the police checked him over that night too.

@RubyWooRed yes, Scotland's highest paid legal aid advocate most years. Then in addition to him there will have been a solicitor on legal aid instructing him.