A carefully constructed truth?...

 

My reason for becoming involved in Luke Mitchell's campaign, was always the pursuit of truth. Little did I know that I would be led in the direction of a carefully constructed truth.

I became involved in Luke's campaign after watching Channel Five's documentary Murder in a Small town, in February 2021. I remembered the high profile case from back in 2003, and at the time, I was never quite sure why Luke had been convicted in January 2005, other than the implication that he had found Jodi's body. After the documentary, I began to read everything I could find. It became apparent that other than media articles and online forums, the only seemingly credible sources for case facts were the appeal papers, and a book called Innocents Betrayed, by Dr Sandra Lean - the criminologist who had spoken in the documentary. I purchased the book and read it several times over, taking notes. The book goes in to detail regarding people who were known to the investigation but apparently never investigated, and who were never suspects but seemingly should have been, the outrageous and unfair treatment that Luke had received, and in a nutshell summarized that a miscarriage of justice had occurred. I believed that if anything in the book was untrue, the author would have been sued or called out on it, but that didn't appear to have happened. Or maybe I was looking in the wrong places?

I joined a few Facebook groups dedicated to Luke's case - some had the aim of pursuing an independent review in to the case. I became invested in the fight to get the facts out there, because based on what I had read, and believed, a miscarriage of justice had certainly occurred. The truth had been manipulated by investigators, as well as a justice system who clearly had no real interest in actual justice. 

As an admin in one of the main groups, I made posts almost daily on topics that were covered in the book, and even while I was at work and had 5 minutes, I would answer questions from people who wanted to know more about the case. For two years, I put my trust in the information that came from the book - and the author herself, Dr Sandra Lean, who regularly updated us with information and answered questions on the case. Anyone who posted misinformation about the case, had to be corrected by admins and moderators, and there was a real emphasis on the idea that Luke's conviction had been based on twisted truths and the fact that a large amount of evidence had been with-held from the defence. 

How could the jury have made an informed decision when they weren't given all of the facts?

I eventually left the admin team due to witnessing some disturbing treatment of other team members by other admins. Anyone who questioned the behavior of those at the top was subsequently cast out and usually blocked. Six admins/moderators left (some were removed), around the same time. I decided to continue the fight away from the groups.

Recently, a friend mentioned to me that the transcripts should be available for the case. That couldn't be possible, we had always been told that they weren't.

I looked at the court transcript information, and there it was in black and while - transcripts could be applied for. My friend e-mailed the court to query the availability of the transcripts from Luke's case and a reply confirmed that they could indeed be made available, along with an estimate of the price. This was significant and worth posting on Twitter, which I did - to let people know they were available.

A podcast soon followed with Dr Lean correcting the misinformation about the availability of the transcripts and explaining that no, they were not available, only a specified person could apply under specific conditions and it would be too expensive. It was also explained that the money would be better going to something that could actually take the case forward, rather than fundraising for transcripts (there hasn't actually been any fundraising campaigns for the transcripts).

https://lukemitchelltrial.blogspot.com/2023/11/availability-of-trial-transcripts.html

I phoned the court to clarify whether this was the case - they confirmed that anyone could apply. 

I was not prepared for what I discovered upon reading the first sections of transcripts. There were several pieces of information that I had not been aware of - some that contradicted what we had been told and that which is written in the book.

lukemitchelltrialtranscripts.blogspot.com

I have had to remove blogs and videos that I'd spent time creating because I now know that they contain information that isn't correct. 

When people have tried to share the information from the transcripts online, they have been blocked by the two big groups. Why?

If this campaign is all about truth and justice and criticizing the withholding of facts and information - why are the leaders of this campaign doing exactly the same thing?

People have the right to the facts - people who are investing their time and energy voluntarily, to fight for a cause they believe to be worthwhile, absolutely deserve to have the facts so that they can make an informed decision.

Is it fair to criticise the investigation for withholding information, while at the same time, being okay with information being withheld and ommited in other areas?  

Why were we told the transcripts weren't available when they are? 

If Luke really is innocent and this cause is worth fighting for, everything should be transparent.