THE LUKE MITCHELL TRIAL

A new Facebook group has been created to facilitate further discussions and anyone is welcome to join.  It will be moderated, to ensure a cordial environment. It can be found by clicking on this link.

As someone with over 20 years of experience in various, detailed, historical research undertakings and often resulting in major new findings, publicised world-wide, I understand the importance of original case evidence. Frequently, what has subsequently been reported, is factually erroneous and in later y ears, often incorporates a one-dimensional spin. Literally, "pouring over witness testimonies", is a vital component. In the Luke Mitchell case, it was the absence of actual trial transcripts, which was frustrating and thus reliant on either contemporary newspaper reports, or ensuing publications and documentaries which promoted a specific agenda - our potential miscarriage of justice. However, the asserted unavailability of trial documentation, primarily, if not exclusively, from Luke's representative and  author, Sandra Lean, existed for many years, even until October 2023 and a myth only dispelled, around the same time. Whilst unlikely they will reveal any material, 

Trial transcript are continually being obtained, at their own expense, by prominent supporters regarding a potential miscarriage of justice and simply wishing the facts to be fully open, rather than a selective publication, often bearing a preconceived agenda. One example of actual trial proceedings being signed off, is statedly certified: "...in terms of Section 94(7) of the Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1995 that this transcript is a correct and complete transcript of part of the record..." etc. It is dated 12 January, 2007. Despite Sandra Lean's proclamations otherwise, have trial transcripts, only revealed now, in truth, been available to us all for 16 years and at no more than a copying/admin fee, working out to be approx.60p per page? Yet, as we know, only recently, Sandra Lean still vehemently asserted that obtaining copies were impossible and even if, would cost circa £60,000. See the true, factual background, in my  8 November blog , regarding same.

Newly available online and further enabling a factual perspective. I believe more will follow, shortly and cover a targeted, significant three day trial period. I also understand this is because it was all which was affordable to the purchaser(s), long-standing campaigner(s), questioning the evidential basis for Luke's conviction. Regrettably, this fundamentally relates to Sandra Lean's 29 October, 2023 YouTube video, in which Sandra castigates "mischief makers", implying that a call for funding to purchase transcripts, at enormous expense of having the trial proceeds transcribed - quoting a figure of circa £60,000 to Bob Ruff, in our 15 October, 2023 podcast - was undermining the 'campaign'. Plus, they were not available anyway, Sandra just previously having cited, in detail, obsolete, 1993 legislation, which said so. There was never any request for a collective funding, as it had suddenly been realised by Luke's supporters, that trial transcripts were ac

Regarding Sandra Lean's recent, YouTube 'Birthday bash Update' video, Sandra states: "So, I invite anybody who can be bothered to do so, to go back and listen to every word of my "recent" YouTube video, which was the 29th October, just so you can find it easily. I suggested that my 60th could, in part, be used as a fundraiser and  as an opportunity for us all to get together and have some fun. I made it absolutely clear, that I would have no part to do with anything to do with any money. I couldn't have made that any clearer and I did not, nowhere at any point, did I say the fundraising was for Luke Mitchell and you all know why; because it's not and never was".   Quoting Sandra from the 29th October video: "So... fundraising. I have a little idea. Let's see how you feel about it. So, this December, I am 60... (...) ... but I thought, wouldn't it be fun, if we had a big birthday bash, this December. Not for me! I don't want anyth

There is a vast amount of case material, available on an archived forum. On Android, it is seemingly only accessible using the Tapatalk app - not sure about other platforms. Run the app and search for, under DISCUSSIONS: Luke Mitchell - Postings now archived. See new thread. This contains 572 postings between: 16 May, 2009 - 5 May, 2010 Amongst the content is a considerable amount of detailed case evidence, cited and discussed by Sandra Lean, originally using an alias of 'Angeline'. Being relatively early, the focus is on case evidence at that point and particularly informative regarding the trial itself. Additionally, there is a significant involvement from Corinne Mitchell and this provides some insights, perhaps not available elsewhere. The following are all of Corinne's primary, related comments, dating from 2010. The use of (...), indicates further, separate postings, that same day. As extracts, this is regarded as 'fair use' in terms of copyright. 25 March For

24 September, 2023 'Bob Ruff podcast' During this discussion, Bob Ruff notes that 'court files', are readily available in the U.S., to which Sandra Lean responds: "No, they're not made public over here, at all. Certain documents, like the appeal documents, are made public, but that's it. And trial transcripts are massively expensive, hugely and although I have the defence papers, it's actually an offence for me to share them, to third parties who are not directly working on this case. So, if we were to put them on line, for example, they're gonna come through me. Simple as that and that's why I can take excerpts and I can show excerpts, but the minute I start to put full documents out, that's when I cross the line". Circa 4:45 minutes into the  full interview recording. 15 October, 2023 'Bob Ruff podcast' Sandra Lean begins: The first question is actually not on the list, it only came up in the last couple of days. You will reme