IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Ian Stephen , Jodi Jones , Luke Mitchell , murder cases

Reply
Old 23rd March 2021, 04:33 PM   #401
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Interesting when minds are changed on these threads.
It is not common, but hopefully shows a better face of social media.
I can't see from first principles how Luke could have pulled this crime off with preplanning and everything that needed to drop into place for him not to be nailed smoking gun style.

Typed from a cheap Samsung.
m

Originally Posted by Samson View Post
Interesting when minds are changed on these threads.
It is not common, but hopefully shows a better face of social media.
I can't see from first principles how Luke could have pulled this crime off with preplanning and everything that needed to drop into place for him not to be nailed smoking gun style.

Typed from a cheap Samsung.
I concur, though I have some doubt re Luke’s innocence. This doubt arises when I think about the following theory (unlikely as said theory may be): LM left his house immediately after finding out JM was ungrounded; he walked briskly to meet her (maybe running at times); he phoned the speaking clock when on his journey to meet her; met her a few minutes later, where a potential argument ensued between them; said argument continued along the path (they could’ve walked the wooded path to the rendezvous point behind the v, or just along the normal path and then both went over the wall for a spliff or Luke suggested go over it for whatever reason); Luke snapped and carried out the horrific murder; went home using the route that traverses the small river, maybe cleaned up there a good bit and changed into other clothing that he may have had in a long parka jacket, and then disposed of the evidence; or maybe, not having a change of clothes, just cleaned up at river a little and headed towards newbattle and hung around near the college for a bit (where he was spotted by Fleming and Walsh who said he was looking particularly suspicious). Yeah, it’s implausible & highly unlikely that the above happened, but not impossible. Improbable, yes. Impossible, no. His brother’s testimony leaves room for people to theorise that the above events could have taken place, even though it’s unlikely.

Bottom line is: there is still a lot of doubt regarding his guilt, imo. The above is the only series of events I can think that happened if Luke was the killer.
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2021, 08:39 PM   #402
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
I don't think there's anything strange about the finding of the body, only about the circumstances once the police have worked hard to make it sound strange.

Luke was already outside taking Mia for a walk when he received the text from Judith (meant for Jodi) saying that's enough, get right back here, you're grounded. Luke immediately phoned Judith back to say he hadn't seen Jodi all evening. That seems to have been a short call but was soon followed by one to him from Judith, in tears, saying nobody had any idea where Jodi was. All this happened while Luke was outside, with a torch and Mia on her lead.

Luke then said to Judith that he would walk towards Easthouses, with Mia, and if he found Jodi on the way, great, if not he'd continue to her house and the grown-ups could decide what to do. He then headed for the western end of the path and along the path, but walking fast with Mia pulling on her lead, and Luke not encouraging her to find anything. When he got to the junction with Lady Path he met Alice, Janine and Steven, and we know what happened after that.

So that's why Corinne wasn't with him. He didn't return home after taking the phone call from Judith. And that's why Corinne didn't know where he'd gone.

Then there was some discussion about which way to go and the four people set off back the way Luke had come, probably because that was the way Jodi had been expected to go and maybe they should go to Newbattle to look for her, this isn't clear, but it doesn't seem like an unreasonable decision. At this point Luke started to urge Mia to "find Jodi", which eventually led to Mia jumping up against the wall and indicating that there was something interesting or unusual on the other side of it. Luke went to where he could get over the wall, leaving Alice holding Mia's lead, and headed towards the line that Mia had seemed to indicate. That's when he saw what he at first thought to be a dumped shop-window mannequin, and then he realised it was Jodi.

I don't see what's so unlikely about any of that quite honestly. And there isn't a shred of evidence to contradict a word of it, once you realise that Janine and Steven's accounts were originally the same as Luke's and only changed later after the police had spoken to them about it.

Also, what interest in knives? Is this any better evidenced than Rafaelle Sollecito's alleged similar interest? (When I was 14 I carried a sheath knife in my belt because I thought this made me a real country girl. Nobody would let me do that now, but I did it. I used it for cutting the twine on hay bales and things like that. I sliced my thumb on it while trimming a sheep's foot, I've still got the scar. Does that make me a likely murderer?)

And what "concerning behaviour" was reported by his teachers that you wouldn't find in a fair cross-section of 14 year old boys? And what supposed threats against what previous girlfriend? There's a lot of vague innuendo around this case that doesn't seem to have much evidence behind it.
Hi, Rolfe. Thanks, once again, for your replies. As I said, the more one reads about this case, the more, paradoxically, one becomes confused. I am in the not proven camp and would welcome a retrial with all alacrity. Unfortunately, I think it would be futile, as the procedures that should’ve been done at the time — procedures that could’ve yielded results that would’ve done wonders for LM’s defence — were all ignored by an inadequate investigation by L&B P. Just to reiterate, I think SK, JAJ, JOJ, AW, JF, GD, DD, MK, JFALC and the known sex offender who was staying at the Sun Inn all should’ve, at the time, been thoroughly investigated as LM was (the male youths in that list of names above were all known to police and smoked and dealt cannabis). Another big opportunity missed during the investigation was the the failure to obtain telecommunications evidence such as mobile phone tracking; this info would’ve been crucial as it would’ve proved where each person was exactly during the times of 1650-1740. (I know LM’s defence team couldn’t get legal aid funds for this, or that the vital data couldn’t be retrieved by the time their legal aid funds became available. Why didn’t the police get this info? Was the onus solely on the defence?) It should also be noted that eyewitness AB’s brother-in-law was at the Jones’s household on the morning of July 1st 2003 @ 0800 discussing her sighting. It’s incredible that this wasn’t investigated.

Rolfe, you said that LM never returned to the house when he received the text and call from JUJ when he was out with Mia. In the James English interview, CM said that LM did come back in the house (after only being out a couple of minutes) and said to CM that he was going out to look for JODJ as she wasn’t home yet. CM said she said: “Not at this late hour you’re not, young man!” LM insisted he was, no matter what. Then CM advised him to take Mia because he was so hell bent on going to look for her. CM then borrowed a torch from his brother SM and went to meet the search party at the EH end of RDP. While we’re back on the subject of the search, I find it a bit odd that LM was some hundred yards behind the search party when he had to shout on them to track back when Mia got the scent when she was put on tracker mode. Likewise, I find it odd that they were able to see, in the pitch black of night, when they were a hundred yards in front of LM, that he never walked past the V.
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd March 2021, 09:08 PM   #403
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
As far back as primary school, a music teacher witnessed LM trying to ‘throttle’ another pupil and the teacher was so concerned that they suggested lm go to a psychologist. It was declined. In high school, LM was getting into a lot of fights and was referred to the guidance teacher (this seems more innocuous than trying to ‘throttle’ someone, which is very concerning behaviour for one so young in primary school). In high school, teachers were becoming concerned with the nature of the content in LM’s essays (satanism, nihilism and godlessness . . . well, I wasn’t raised Catholic, but I would hazard a guess that the school teachers may have been overreacting here; still, it’s interesting and relevant when taking everything in the context of the full case). It’s all well documented and easily found via a google search. Will try and get link.

Kara Van Nuil dated Mitchell. What she claims he did to her when she dated him when they were both in the cadets is interesting.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/31...s-of-innocence
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 03:35 AM   #404
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 8,432
Originally Posted by McStarj19 View Post

Kara Van Nuil dated Mitchell. What she claims he did to her when she dated him when they were both in the cadets is interesting.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/31...s-of-innocence
I note this sentence about that:

"It was not until Jodi's slaying that Ms Van Nuil ... decided to tell her friends and family of the terrifying encounter."

So there's no record of her ever mentioning this terrifying attack to anybody at the time. That doesn't mean she made it up, but if she had mentioned it to somebody, anybody, that would be good supporting evidence that currently doesn't exist.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 04:38 AM   #405
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,042
Was there testimony or was it just a newspaper account?

From the linked Express article: "But Jodi's mother, Judith, yesterday told the Scottish Sunday Express: "It is disgusting, that's all I can say about it."" This is more evidence that a claim of dignified silence does not hold up to even casual scrutiny.

As for Ms. Nuil, I have yet to see any report to the effect that she testified in court. Despite my criticisms of how it was used regarding Shane Mitchell, I remain of the strong opinion that cross-examination is an essential tool tool in criminal and civil matters.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 09:32 AM   #406
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,180
Quote:
I concur, though I have some doubt re Luke’s innocence. This doubt arises when I think about the following theory (unlikely as said theory may be): LM left his house immediately after finding out JM was ungrounded; he walked briskly to meet her (maybe running at times); he phoned the speaking clock when on his journey to meet her; met her a few minutes later, where a potential argument ensued between them; said argument continued along the path (they could’ve walked the wooded path to the rendezvous point behind the v, or just along the normal path and then both went over the wall for a spliff or Luke suggested go over it for whatever reason); Luke snapped and carried out the horrific murder; went home using the route that traverses the small river, maybe cleaned up there a good bit and changed into other clothing that he may have had in a long parka jacket, and then disposed of the evidence; or maybe, not having a change of clothes, just cleaned up at river a little and headed towards newbattle and hung around near the college for a bit (where he was spotted by Fleming and Walsh who said he was looking particularly suspicious). Yeah, it’s implausible & highly unlikely that the above happened, but not impossible. Improbable, yes. Impossible, no. His brother’s testimony leaves room for people to theorise that the above events could have taken place, even though it’s unlikely.

Bottom line is: there is still a lot of doubt regarding his guilt, imo. The above is the only series of events I can think that happened if Luke was the killer.

You're right, that's the only way it could have happened and that's what the police tried to prove. The main problem is that there isn't a single shred of evidence any of it actually happened. None at all. Zilch. And why did he phone the speaking clock in this scenario?
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 09:41 AM   #407
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,180
Quote:
Hi, Rolfe. Thanks, once again, for your replies. As I said, the more one reads about this case, the more, paradoxically, one becomes confused. I am in the not proven camp and would welcome a retrial with all alacrity. Unfortunately, I think it would be futile, as the procedures that should’ve been done at the time — procedures that could’ve yielded results that would’ve done wonders for LM’s defence — were all ignored by an inadequate investigation by L&B P. Just to reiterate, I think SK, JAJ, JOJ, AW, JF, GD, DD, MK, JFALC and the known sex offender who was staying at the Sun Inn all should’ve, at the time, been thoroughly investigated as LM was (the male youths in that list of names above were all known to police and smoked and dealt cannabis). Another big opportunity missed during the investigation was the the failure to obtain telecommunications evidence such as mobile phone tracking; this info would’ve been crucial as it would’ve proved where each person was exactly during the times of 1650-1740. (I know LM’s defence team couldn’t get legal aid funds for this, or that the vital data couldn’t be retrieved by the time their legal aid funds became available. Why didn’t the police get this info? Was the onus solely on the defence?) It should also be noted that eyewitness AB’s brother-in-law was at the Jones’s household on the morning of July 1st 2003 @ 0800 discussing her sighting. It’s incredible that this wasn’t investigated.

There's a lot that's incredible about this. The fact is that the police assumed right from the get-go that Luke was the murderer and simply turned a blind eye to any evidence pointing to anyone else. There are points when I actually wonder if they were deliberately protecting people in the Jones/Walker extended family.

Quote:
Rolfe, you said that LM never returned to the house when he received the text and call from JUJ when he was out with Mia. In the James English interview, CM said that LM did come back in the house (after only being out a couple of minutes) and said to CM that he was going out to look for JODJ as she wasn’t home yet. CM said she said: “Not at this late hour you’re not, young man!” LM insisted he was, no matter what. Then CM advised him to take Mia because he was so hell bent on going to look for her. CM then borrowed a torch from his brother SM and went to meet the search party at the EH end of RDP. While we’re back on the subject of the search, I find it a bit odd that LM was some hundred yards behind the search party when he had to shout on them to track back when Mia got the scent when she was put on tracker mode. Likewise, I find it odd that they were able to see, in the pitch black of night, when they were a hundred yards in front of LM, that he never walked past the V.

That was probably my mistake, misinterpreting something in Sandra's book. I thought she implied that he hadn't returned home after taking the call from Judith, but actually she just didn't mention whether he did or not. So I presume you have the correct information there.

I understand that Luke was behind Steven and Janine because they had walked straight along the path while he had followed Mia into the barley field a few times. Also, Alice was behind Luke because at 67 and with arthritis she was walking more slowly. I don't know that Steven and Janine were as much as 100 yards ahead though, because in an early statement Steven described seeing Mia put her front paws up against the wall and estimated how high her head came relative to the top of the wall.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 09:46 AM   #408
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,180
Quote:
As far back as primary school, a music teacher witnessed LM trying to ‘throttle’ another pupil and the teacher was so concerned that they suggested lm go to a psychologist. It was declined. In high school, LM was getting into a lot of fights and was referred to the guidance teacher (this seems more innocuous than trying to ‘throttle’ someone, which is very concerning behaviour for one so young in primary school). In high school, teachers were becoming concerned with the nature of the content in LM’s essays (satanism, nihilism and godlessness . . . well, I wasn’t raised Catholic, but I would hazard a guess that the school teachers may have been overreacting here; still, it’s interesting and relevant when taking everything in the context of the full case). It’s all well documented and easily found via a google search. Will try and get link.

Kara Van Nuil dated Mitchell. What she claims he did to her when she dated him when they were both in the cadets is interesting.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/31...s-of-innocence

Once someone is being vilified it's easy to dredge up old stories and repackage them as evidence of villainy. Boys fight at primary school. Kids sent to a Catholic school when they themselves are not religious sometimes say and write stuff to shock their teachers. It was open season on Luke Mitchell in 2003-2005 and anyone with a salacious story could be sure of getting the gutter press to print it.

I'm interested in evidence that he actually carried out the murder, not in tittle-tattle that he didn't always behave like an angelic wee boy. I'd take a large bet that if the same vilification exercise had been carried out on any of the other five people involved with Jodi's disappearance who should have been investigated, you'd find pretty comparable stuff without a lot of trouble.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 12:15 PM   #409
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
You're right, that's the only way it could have happened and that's what the police tried to prove. The main problem is that there isn't a single shred of evidence any of it actually happened. None at all. Zilch. And why did he phone the speaking clock in this scenario?
I wonder if the police ever searched that area with the small river? Was it searched extensively? It would’ve kept LM — or any perpetrator — off the main road for a good while and is the most secluded route back home. Could be worth another full-scale search for some buried or dumped clothing and a murder weapon (yeah, I know, highly unlikely). Regarding LM phoning the speaking clock in this scenario — it could’ve just been idle curiosity (as per him supposedly having done this in the past a few times, though this was never proved or used in court), or just him wanting to be 100% sure he wasn’t late, because he was particularly keen on seeing her that evening at 1700. (I know her phone was broken, but maybe it could still display time and Luke knew this; and, at any rate, Jodie would’ve been able to ascertain the time very quickly on her walk to the path without a mobile phone on that busy easthouses main road.) Highly unlikely, as I said.

Btw, can anyone give me a link to Shane’s testimony? Does anyone have excerpts from real transcripts? I have searched far and wide, but, to no avail. I get the gist of his testimony ..... but just want to be sure and satisfy my curiosity.

Also would be grateful for any helpful links to websites that discuss the case sensibly and in detail. Over the last 2 weeks I’ve found 4 or 5 quite good ones (this one, miscarriageofjustice.co, forum.casebook.org, paulvikingforums.com and a couple of other websites I can’t remember; I’ve looked at LM’s 2008 Scotscourt.uk appeal online, too, which is quite detailed and helpful).

Thank you.
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 12:34 PM   #410
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
Once someone is being vilified it's easy to dredge up old stories and repackage them as evidence of villainy. Boys fight at primary school. Kids sent to a Catholic school when they themselves are not religious sometimes say and write stuff to shock their teachers. It was open season on Luke Mitchell in 2003-2005 and anyone with a salacious story could be sure of getting the gutter press to print it.

I'm interested in evidence that he actually carried out the murder, not in tittle-tattle that he didn't always behave like an angelic wee boy. I'd take a large bet that if the same vilification exercise had been carried out on any of the other five people involved with Jodi's disappearance who should have been investigated, you'd find pretty comparable stuff without a lot of trouble.
Absolutely. I can’t argue with any of that. I’ll try and dig out anything that I think may be relevant and of interest, and post stuff of substance and merit backed up with links and sources & citations. I will caveat this by saying, yet again, that I am merely an armchair det with no expertise in Law, Policing, Forensics, Criminology, Psychology, psychiatry, fill in the blanks ........ Someone close to me has a first class honours degree in Law and works in the police. I guess I’ll try and be an autodidact of sorts. Any thoughts on autodidactism?
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 01:12 PM   #411
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,180
Originally Posted by McStarj19 View Post
I wonder if the police ever searched that area with the small river? Was it searched extensively? It would’ve kept LM — or any perpetrator — off the main road for a good while and is the most secluded route back home. Could be worth another full-scale search for some buried or dumped clothing and a murder weapon (yeah, I know, highly unlikely). Regarding LM phoning the speaking clock in this scenario — it could’ve just been idle curiosity (as per him supposedly having done this in the past a few times, though this was never proved or used in court), or just him wanting to be 100% sure he wasn’t late, because he was particularly keen on seeing her that evening at 1700. (I know her phone was broken, but maybe it could still display time and Luke knew this; and, at any rate, Jodie would’ve been able to ascertain the time very quickly on her walk to the path without a mobile phone on that busy easthouses main road.) Highly unlikely, as I said.

Btw, can anyone give me a link to Shane’s testimony? Does anyone have excerpts from real transcripts? I have searched far and wide, but, to no avail. I get the gist of his testimony ..... but just want to be sure and satisfy my curiosity.

Also would be grateful for any helpful links to websites that discuss the case sensibly and in detail. Over the last 2 weeks I’ve found 4 or 5 quite good ones (this one, miscarriageofjustice.co, forum.casebook.org, paulvikingforums.com and a couple of other websites I can’t remember; I’ve looked at LM’s 2008 Scotscourt.uk appeal online, too, which is quite detailed and helpful).

Thank you.

I don't have any special source of information beyond Sandra's book, which I believe to be factually accurate.

The trouble with alternative routes back to Newbattle is that the South Esk has to be crossed and there's no other way apart from the two bridges just south of Luke's street. Given that Roan's Dyke Path is itself secluded so there's no real reason to avoid it so all you avoid is the section of Newbattle Road south of the bridge.

Bear in mind that one of the pieces of evidence the police were very keen on was the alleged sighting of him on Newbattle Road just north of the end of the path, at 5.45. So the police weren't alleging he'd taken a back route home, quite the opposite.

Even in 2003, working mobile phones displayed the time without any need to phone the speaking clock. Luke's phone was working, all he had to do was to look at it. And there's no special reason why he would have needed to know the time anyway, as far as I can see. If he was indeed walking to meet Jodi, all he had to do was walk along the path and then up towards her house, or wait at the Easthouses end of the path.

I think phoning the speaking clock was weird, but I can see it as being more likely if he was pottering about at home, waiting for the dinner to cook and at a relative loose end, than if he was hurrying to meet Jodi, even running in places.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 24th March 2021, 01:25 PM   #412
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,180
Quote:
Absolutely. I can’t argue with any of that. I’ll try and dig out anything that I think may be relevant and of interest, and post stuff of substance and merit backed up with links and sources & citations. I will caveat this by saying, yet again, that I am merely an armchair det with no expertise in Law, Policing, Forensics, Criminology, Psychology, psychiatry, fill in the blanks ........ Someone close to me has a first class honours degree in Law and works in the police. I guess I’ll try and be an autodidact of sorts. Any thoughts on autodidactism?

My main thoughts on cases like this are as follows.
  1. What was the reason the police first began to suspect the person they fixed on?
  2. What is the actual evidence that person committed the crime? Not tittle-tattle about whether they pulled girls' pigtails or wore black t-shirts or liked violent video games, actual evidence linking them to the crime.
  3. What about other suspects, is there any evidence, or indeed equally credible evidence pointing to anyone else?
We can see in this case that the initial reasons for suspecting Luke were essentially non-existent, the police homed in on him within literally minutes of arriving on the scene. We can see that there is no evidence at all that he committed the crime. Absent that, all the stories about pulling pigtails and wearing black t-shirts are utterly irrelevant. Even genuinely bad behaviour unrelated to the crime is utterly irrelevant if there is no evidence linking the person to the crime. Devil-worship, even an attempt to throttle another kid years ago - I don't care. Many people have such episodes in their history, many people do quite shocking things, and many people around Easthouses, Mayfield and Newbattle were and are certainly in that category. They didn't all kill Jodi Jones.

And finally, we can see that multiple other credible suspects were ignored by the police, who not only failed to collect the evidence that might have implicated them, they were handed excuses and get-outs by the police who didn't seem to want to have to bother looking into anyone but Luke Mitchell.

So I come at this from the point of view that the whole thing looks well dodgy and I want to see something fairly incriminating before I'm going to consider that they might have got the right person. So far, nothing.

Compare this with the David Gilroy case. I came at that wondering how on earth they got a conviction on such flimsy evidence, and for sure the police had him pegged as a suspect very early in the investigation when they were still questioning him as a witness, but the more you look at that one the more reasonable the police suspicions appear to be, and the more damning the evidence looks for Gilroy. Same police force, only seven years later.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th March 2021, 10:58 AM   #413
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
There's a lot that's incredible about this. The fact is that the police assumed right from the get-go that Luke was the murderer and simply turned a blind eye to any evidence pointing to anyone else.
It seems like that is what happened. Of course, we can only speculate on why they immediately assumed Luke to be the killer. I surmise they just didn’t like the cut of his jib; probably didn’t like his attitude, appearance and the vibes emanating from him, and the fact he was the boyfriend who found the body most likely heightened their suspicions. Also interesting is that one of the officers dispatched to the crime scene that night said of Luke: “He gave us the run-around” (in reference to the directions Luke gave to them the phone). So, to compound problems, it seems that Luke never got off to the most auspicious start with the police. (I can’t find the link to the source re the policeman’s ‘run-around’ comment, but I definitely read it previously. Guess I can ask Sandra to expand on it.)
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th March 2021, 11:11 AM   #414
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,042
Runaround Luke

I don't have Sandra Lean's book in front of me, but the "he gave us the runaround" issue is dubious. There was some confusion, IIRC, but it was not Luke's fault.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th March 2021, 11:34 AM   #415
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,180
According to Sandra's book the "gave us the runaround" was pure misunderstanding. The policemen who were taking various telephone calls repeatedly misunderstood where various people were (not only Luke) and as a result Luke was described as "galloping around behind the school" when in fact he hadn't moved from the gap in the wall.

A 14-year-old boy has just found the murdered body of his 14-year-old girlfriend. Is it the job of an investigator to be making judgements about his attitude, his appearance, his vibes or the cut of his jib at that stage, and acting on them? Maybe making a note of everybody's reactions and so on for later consideration, but to justify cutting out the only child there and subjecting him and him only to aggressive interrogation and detailed forensic examination when no evidence at all has yet been gathered?
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th March 2021, 01:26 PM   #416
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 16,995
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
According to Sandra's book the "gave us the runaround" was pure misunderstanding. The policemen who were taking various telephone calls repeatedly misunderstood where various people were (not only Luke) and as a result Luke was described as "galloping around behind the school" when in fact he hadn't moved from the gap in the wall.

A 14-year-old boy has just found the murdered body of his 14-year-old girlfriend. Is it the job of an investigator to be making judgements about his attitude, his appearance, his vibes or the cut of his jib at that stage, and acting on them? Maybe making a note of everybody's reactions and so on for later consideration, but to justify cutting out the only child there and subjecting him and him only to aggressive interrogation and detailed forensic examination when no evidence at all has yet been gathered?

Absolutely. And over and above this: once the finger of suspicion started to point towards Luke Mitchell, it's extremely easy to suspect that the police started to "rewrite history" - whether consciously or unconsciously - wrt their earlier observations about him. What may not have been judged as particularly suspicious on Day 1 might easily have morphed into something significantly more damaging to Luke by Day 2 or 3.


(In fact, in this case a subjective attachment of suspicion to Luke's behaviour and actions might well even have been underway in real time, even before the body was discovered. If the police had already decided that, from what they knew about the situation once they arrived on scene, Luke was their opening-gambit prime suspect, then they might well have been viewing his actions/behaviours through that warped "guilty" lens right from the get-go.)
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 25th March 2021, 04:41 PM   #417
Rolfe
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
Rolfe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: NT 150 511
Posts: 47,180
I think your second paragraph is closer to the truth.

The cops were originally called by Judith (Jodi's mother) for a missing person alert. She told them that Jodi had gone to meet her boyfriend and as far as she knew she had been with him. Then the boyfriend called 999, having found the body. I think they knew that over 70% of female murder victims are killed by someone known to them, and that the intimate partner is probably top of the suspect list. They also knew the common assumption (which also got Knox and Sollecito, although I have no idea if it's actually true) that the murderer will often insert himself into the search and lead the searchers to the body. I think they decided on that basis that Luke was the one to suspect. (I don't think they factored in the point that the youngest "intimate partner" murderers are about seventeen - it's not a child's crime, the crime of adolescent puppy-love.)

I also wonder if there was someone or someones in the police actively protecting the Jones/Walker family. I understand they had relatives working for the police force.
__________________
"The way we vote will depend, ultimately, on whether we are persuaded to hope or to fear." - Aonghas MacNeacail, June 2012.
Rolfe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th March 2021, 01:48 AM   #418
Samson
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 9,475
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Absolutely. And over and above this: once the finger of suspicion started to point towards Luke Mitchell, it's extremely easy to suspect that the police started to "rewrite history" - whether consciously or unconsciously - wrt their earlier observations about him. What may not have been judged as particularly suspicious on Day 1 might easily have morphed into something significantly more damaging to Luke by Day 2 or 3.


(In fact, in this case a subjective attachment of suspicion to Luke's behaviour and actions might well even have been underway in real time, even before the body was discovered. If the police had already decided that, from what they knew about the situation once they arrived on scene, Luke was their opening-gambit prime suspect, then they might well have been viewing his actions/behaviours through that warped "guilty" lens right from the get-go.)
So common. And in fact a necessary morphing for the police and community.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 26th March 2021, 10:18 AM   #419
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
Just quickly, can someone tell me the timeline of SM’s statements? I keep reading contrasting accounts of what he said and when he said it, which is both frustrating and concerning. The general consensus, from what I’ve read thus far, is that SM gave a statement to police on 07.07.03 — the day after CM gave hers. In SM’s statement on 07.07.03 he told police that he had seen LM in the house on 30.06.03 when he arrived home from work @ 1640 HRS. SM subsequently changed his statement on 14.04.04 — after, supposedly, a relentless and forceful interrogation by L&B P and being charged with perverting the course of justice —, saying that, in fact, he couldn’t be be sure if he had seen Luke in the house that day and may have been masturbating to porn on his computer (something, the prosecution suggested, he would not have done had his little brother been in the house). Is that correct? Or did SM give a statement prior to the one he had given on 07.07.03? For example, did he give a statement on 03.07.03 saying that he didn’t see Luke in the house on 30.06.03 (or that he couldn’t be sure if he had seen LM on that day)?

I would be really grateful if someone could clarify the above for me, as it’s been annoying me the past few days.

Last edited by McStarj19; 26th March 2021 at 10:59 AM. Reason: typo
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2021, 04:55 AM   #420
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,042
quick thoughts on Shane's initial interviews

Shane's first statement was on 3 July, and his second statement was recorded on 7 July. Both statements were taken by the FLO. Shane was interrogated for six hours on 14 April 2004, allegedly for attempting to pervert the course of justice.

On 3 July he said that he arrived home at 3:30. In his amended statement he included the fact that he had stopped on the way home to help a friend with his car and that he arrived home around 4:40.

One thing that does not get mentioned frequently is that Shane's second account is supported by three other people and by texts. Sandra Lean indicates on p. 307 that Shane had initially been recalling the wrong evening.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 27th March 2021 at 05:15 AM.
Chris_Halkides is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th March 2021, 05:31 AM   #421
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
Thanks, Chris. Could you expand on what he said on the 03.07.03? Did he say he didn’t see Luke when he got home or couldn’t be sure if he saw him? Also, on the 07.07.03 did Shane say he saw Luke ‘mashing tatties’?
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th March 2021, 04:28 AM   #422
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,042
car sites

I don't have as much information as would be ideal. However, I came across some passages from Sandra Lean's book that bear on the general topic of Shane's statements (pp. 318 and 319).

"Shane originally told investigators he was looking at car sites-the computer records demonstrated that the links to pornographic sites each connected for a few seconds, indicating that they were, almost certainly, pop-ups."

"Prior to the introduction of the photographs, Shane argued repeatedly that investigators would not accept his answers, that they were putting words into his mouth and altering the responses that he gave them. He told the court that he did see Luke when he (Shane) came down for tea, but the police would not believe him because his had not said so in his first statement...His first statements said that he came through the front door, yelled "Hello" to someone.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2021, 07:18 PM   #423
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,042
DNA agreement; possibility of the association fallacy

I have read of an agreement between the prosecution and defense concerning DNA evidence. Did this agreement cover only DNA evidence involving samples of Luke's clothing (a pair of his trousers had Jodi's DNA profile IIUC), or did it cover all DNA evidence collected in the case?

Regarding Stephen Kelly, let us assume for a moment that his DNA was found on an item of Jodi's clothing and also that there were sperm heads found. It has occurred to me as possible (not as likely) that his profile is present but that for some reason the sperm heads were from someone else but failed to produce a useful profile. An automatic conclusion that the sperm heads were from him would be an example of the association fallacy. Based on what information is available, I don't think that this is likely, but I would be hesitant to rule it out. Peter Gill's book discusses this fallacy in a general way.
EDT
I realized just now that I have mentioned this idea before. It would help if we knew the locations of the various things (DNA, stains, sperm heads) that were present on Jodi's t-shirt.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)

Last edited by Chris_Halkides; 31st March 2021 at 07:36 PM.
Chris_Halkides is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 31st March 2021, 07:41 PM   #424
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,042
making a mash of it

Originally Posted by McStarj19 View Post
Thanks, Chris. Could you expand on what he said on the 03.07.03? Did he say he didn’t see Luke when he got home or couldn’t be sure if he saw him? Also, on the 07.07.03 did Shane say he saw Luke ‘mashing tatties’?
Yes, the 7 July statement was the one where he talked about mashing tatties, according to one news account I read. I don't have the statement itself.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st April 2021, 11:08 AM   #425
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Rolfe View Post
He was initially perfectly clear that Luke was there when he got home from work at 4.40 . . .
Was he, though? In his initial statement on 03.07.03, he indicated that he got home at 1530 and gave no mention of Luke being there.* After speaking to Corinne between 04.07.03 and 07.07.03 — a time period when Corinne gave her statement (on 06.07.03) and jogged Shane’s memory regarding what he & Luke were doing at dinner time on 30.06.03 — he subsequently changed his statement on 07.07.03, saying he, in fact, got home at 1640 and did see Luke in the kitchen that day. Him giving an amended statement the day immediately after Corinne gave hers (on 06.07.03), to say he did see Luke, could be interpreted as a red flag; of course, it could be entirely innocent, too, as changing statement is a common occurrence during an investigation (and there were certainly statement changes and cause for doubt in the case of JUJ, JAJ, JOJ, SK, JF, GD and MK).

*Rolfe, what is your understanding of Shane’s very first statement on 03.07.03? Did he say he saw Luke when he made this first statement? I can’t seem to get an answer on any forums I post on.
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st April 2021, 12:47 PM   #426
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,042
two memory jogs, not one

I think it is helpful to bear in mind that Corinne was not the only person who jogged Shane's memory. He was also reminded by a friend that he stopped to help fix an automobile. Sandra Lean indicated that Shane remember the wrong day initially.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd April 2021, 05:46 AM   #427
Elaedith
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,531
Originally Posted by Chris_Halkides View Post

EDT
I realized just now that I have mentioned this idea before. It would help if we knew the locations of the various things (DNA, stains, sperm heads) that were present on Jodi's t-shirt.
One of the things I find frustrating about this type of case is the difficulty getting any detailed information about the evidence - mostly only being able to find news reports. I did get a replacement copy of Sandra Lean's book, but I expect everything in it has been thoroughly gone over already on this thread.
__________________
Those who have virtue always in their mouths, and neglect it in practice, are like a harp which emits a sound pleasing to others, while itself is insensible of the music. - Diogenes
Elaedith is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th April 2021, 02:16 AM   #428
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
Here’s a link to an interesting Herald article I stumbled upon last night. It mentions the tattoo saga, but, more interestingly, tells of a chief inspector — a defence witness — expressing his concern about the gory details of how Jodi died being leaked and the amount of photographs of LM being widely distributed in the media immediately after Jodi’s body was found. Even more interesting are the testimonies from a couple in their 30s who said they spotted a young man in his late teens/early 20s wearing a green bomber jacket and dark jeans at a path entrance on the NB road, looking up to no good — but who said it positively was NOT the accused. Hmm . . . I wonder if JF had such a jacket?! I heard that he was due up at court for a separate hearing around the same time as this case, for a violent attack he carried out on a woman (I’m sure SL mentioned this on another forum).

https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/...l-as-customer/
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2021, 10:03 AM   #429
McStarj19
Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Posts: 28
Much has been made of Shane’s testimony and all the websites he may, or may not, have visited between 1653-1716 on 30.06.03. I’m still none the wiser about this case, but here’s an article re DI Cravens’s forensic analysis of SM’s hard drive:

https://www.scotsman.com/news/pc-use...i-died-2509716

Seems to be quite a lot of porn images accessed. Is it possible that such an amount of images was generated from pop-ups during 1754-1716? The article, like so many others, is concise and vague. How was it known that any of the images were only accessed for a couple of seconds?
McStarj19 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2021, 10:08 AM   #430
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 8,432
Originally Posted by McStarj19 View Post
Seems to be quite a lot of porn images accessed. Is it possible that such an amount of images was generated from pop-ups during 1754-1716?
Is 131 a lot? It would be if you were downloading them one at a time for the specific purpose of looking at them. But if you got a pop-up page that had numerous flashing images I could quite imagine getting to 130 in pretty short order. A single page might have dozens of images.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2021, 10:20 AM   #431
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 16,995
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Is 131 a lot? It would be if you were downloading them one at a time for the specific purpose of looking at them. But if you got a pop-up page that had numerous flashing images I could quite imagine getting to 130 in pretty short order. A single page might have dozens of images.

Popups only have one identifier (simplifier: URL) per popup. In other words, a popup which showed thumbnails of 20 images would only have been treated by his PC as one single entity.

The 130 number implies that he received (whether because he requested them, or whether they were automated popups) 130 separate page entities. One possible explanation - especially given that he was paying for access - was that he was quickly downloading as many images as possible in order for him to have them on his PC for *consuming* once he stopped paying the subscription fees.
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2021, 11:42 AM   #432
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,042
DI Cravens' testimony

"He added that the [strange] image had in fact been downloaded from a motoring website and that many of the other websites that had been accessed referred to automobiles." I linked to this article a while back. I agree that the article, although better than some, does not tell me as much I had hoped it would.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th April 2021, 12:11 PM   #433
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 8,432
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Popups only have one identifier (simplifier: URL) per popup. In other words, a popup which showed thumbnails of 20 images would only have been treated by his PC as one single entity.

The 130 number implies that he received (whether because he requested them, or whether they were automated popups) 130 separate page entities. One possible explanation - especially given that he was paying for access - was that he was quickly downloading as many images as possible in order for him to have them on his PC for *consuming* once he stopped paying the subscription fees.

Well that would be conclusive if we knew what the witness was referring to when he said “131 files”. Was he referring to pop-ups or images?
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2021, 03:48 AM   #434
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 24,245
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Is 131 a lot? It would be if you were downloading them one at a time for the specific purpose of looking at them. But if you got a pop-up page that had numerous flashing images I could quite imagine getting to 130 in pretty short order. A single page might have dozens of images.
Originally Posted by LondonJohn View Post
Popups only have one identifier (simplifier: URL) per popup. In other words, a popup which showed thumbnails of 20 images would only have been treated by his PC as one single entity.

The 130 number implies that he received (whether because he requested them, or whether they were automated popups) 130 separate page entities. One possible explanation - especially given that he was paying for access - was that he was quickly downloading as many images as possible in order for him to have them on his PC for *consuming* once he stopped paying the subscription fees.
No, it doesn't. Loading this forum page creates, for me, 101 unique and separate files.
  • 87 small GIFs for buttons et cetera
  • 9 JS JavaScripts
  • 3 CSS style sheets
  • 2 PNG images, for ISF logos
  • 1 HTML file containing the page text

The analyst's testimony mentions "131 files had been created on the computer’s hard drive during the internet session" without any specifics. This suggest they were a mix of html, images and other types such as css, js et cetera. There is no evidence of 131 images. It's entirely possible for the loading of a single webpage to create dozens of separate files as images are separate from html.

The analysts also states that the files were of a "pornographic nature", however it's pointed out that several of the sites visited related to vehicles and at least one images, from such a site, was classed by the officer as "pornographic". He also failed to rebut, or address, the issue of pop-ups.

Having been an expert witness the quoted portion of the analyst's testimony strikes me as highly selective, not to say biased.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2021, 03:55 AM   #435
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 24,245
Originally Posted by Matthew Best View Post
Well that would be conclusive if we knew what the witness was referring to when he said “131 files”. Was he referring to pop-ups or images?
The analyst quite definitely said "files". There was no mention of URLs in his testimony, either now or in 2005 where he mentioned unspecified "pornographic sites" as well as other sites "which appeared to be connected with cars".
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th April 2021, 07:24 AM   #436
Matthew Best
Philosopher
 
Matthew Best's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Leicester Square, London
Posts: 8,432
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
The analyst quite definitely said "files". There was no mention of URLs in his testimony, either now or in 2005 where he mentioned unspecified "pornographic sites" as well as other sites "which appeared to be connected with cars".
Thanks. That's more like what I thought it would be. Reporting it as 131 separate files seems designed to make it seem worse than it possibly was.
Matthew Best is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:33 PM   #437
LondonJohn
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 16,995
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
The analyst quite definitely said "files". There was no mention of URLs in his testimony, either now or in 2005 where he mentioned unspecified "pornographic sites" as well as other sites "which appeared to be connected with cars".

I wasn't suggesting that he was saving webpages.

Rather, that he was saving pornographic images from webpages.

To me, it would be very strange indeed for an expert to use the word "files" if he was referring to every individual element of a web page (including each .gif, each piece of javascript, each thumbnail, etc).
LondonJohn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:10 PM   #438
Chris_Halkides
Penultimate Amazing
 
Chris_Halkides's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 10,042
balance of probabilities regarding the time in question

The prosecution would have us believe that Shane was masturbating, but the available evidence makes this assertion dubious. He was clearly accessing automotive sites some of the time. Could have been downloading pornographic images in an interleaved manner for later? That is less unlikely. What is not unlikely is that a police witness would shade his or her testimony in a way that favored the prosecution's case.
__________________
It is possible both to be right about an issue and to take oneself a little too seriously, but I would rather be reminded of that by a friend than a foe. (a tip of the hat to Foolmewunz)
Chris_Halkides is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:30 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.