All language subtitles for Murder in a Small Town S01 E02_track3_[eng]

REPORTER: 14-year-old schoolgirl
killed in broad daylight.

Jodi Jones had everything
to live for,

but her life was cut truly short
when she was brutally attacked.

Jodi had been beaten.

Her throat was cut between
12 and 20 times.

É

é

There's a maniac roaming among us.

É

é

F

Luke Mitchell was
a devil worshipper.

This stuff was being
gobbled up insatiably

in broadsheets as well as tabloids.

F

There's something wrong with
this conviction.

There is no forensic evidence
to link him to the crime.

É

F

If we found something that could
exonerate Luke Mitchell

or implicate someone else,
it would be massive.

There was DNA, male DNA on the body,

but it wasn't Luke's.

É

é

F

F

F

If Luke Mitchell didn't killJodi,

somebody else did.

I can't be more clear.

I absolutely did not killJodi.

I want to clear my name.

NEWSREADER: The boyfriend of
14-year-old Dalkeith schoolgirl

Jodi Jones has gone on trial
accused of her murder.

The jury are being asked to decide
if a 14-year-old girl was murdered

by her 14-year-old boyfriend.

Luke Mitchell's trial began in a
blaze of publicity in November 2004,

18 months after the murder
of Jodi Jones.

This was in the media across
the whole of Scotland.

This was a massive story.

This case became monstrous.

It wasn't just an issue
that obsessed the police

and the prosecution services
and, you know,

the legal world and the press.

This obsessed everybody.
Everyone was talking about this.

And this emphasis on the evil,

on the occult, on the Satanist.

É

é

é

é

With no murder weapon, no confession
and no forensic evidence,

the Crown's case against
Luke Mitchell

was entirely circumstantial.

Circumstantial evidence is a number
of different circumstances,

which, taken on the own, might mean
little or sometimes nothing

but, when put together
in a particular way,

point the finger towards
the accused.

The prosecution case depended on
three central planks.

Firstly, that he found the body.

And the assumption was that
since he found the body,

he must have known where it was.

Secondly, that he was seen by
an independent witness.

A local woman had seen a young
couple just before the murder.

She later identified Luke Mitchell
as the male she saw.

The alibi that he claimed to have
was not accepted.

The final plank in the prosecution's
case against Luke Mitchell

was that his mother gave him
a false alibi

and burned evidence to protect him.

Luke's alibi was that he was at home
cooking dinner and having dinner

with his mum and his brother.

Having heard all the evidence

and being cautioned
not to rush to judgment,

the jury retired on 20 January 2005.

24 hours later,
they found Luke Mitchell...

...guilty.

Lord Nimmo Smith told him,

"You can rightly be regarded
as wicked."

DIAL TONE

F

é

£

REPORTER: Luke Mitchell was then led
away without a flicker of emotion.

Like so many families that I've met
in the same circumstances,

the belief it'll all come out
in court,

it is not until the foreman of
the jury stands up and says guilty

that these people realise
that truth's not coming out.

Lord Nimmo Smith told Luke Mitchell

he'd serve at least 20 years
in prison.

É

£

é

SHE SIGHS

é

é

F

F

é

If Mitchell's guilty, then
he deserves to rot in prison

for the rest of his life.

But equally, if he's not guilty,

then society has done
something dreadful

and we need to look at ourselves.

Former detectives John Sallens
and Mick Neill

have agreed to re-examine the case
against Luke Mitchell

for this documentary.

John and I will be looking for
something that somebody's missed.

It may be simple as that -

somebody's maybe missed something.

Scientists at the Forensic Institute
in Glasgow

specialise in criminal casework
in the UK and internationally.

Obviously, Michael and I have
been up at the crime scene

and we're looking for your sort of
overview on this.

É

é

é

F

é

é

F

Luke's clothing was not only seized,
but it was forensically examined

and there was no traces of
forensic evidence found on Luke

to link him to Jodi.

There was dirt found under
his fingernails

and his hair was described as
being dirty, I believe.

What lengths would you have to go
off to get rid of every trace

of forensic evidence?

I'm basically asking,

jumping in the shower and using
standard shower gel,

would that do it?

É

£

Suggest, yeah.

É

é

F

é

F

F

F

é

For Luke to have escaped, he would
have had to come up this street.

Now, just have a look.
Look how wide open it is.

The houses loop right out onto
the road.

There's no fences.

And the idea that a killer covered
in blood would have managed to

come up this street, unseen,
in broad daylight,

on a beautiful summer evening...

...is ridiculous.

Police raided and searched
Luke Mitchell's home three times

before he was finally arrested
in April 2004.

No traces of Jodi Jones' blood
was ever found.

17 years after the murder
of Jodi Jones,

the quiet town of Dalkeith
remains in the public spotlight,

as Luke Mitchell continues to
maintain his innocence.

Why do you still live in this area?

F

Q

F

F

F

When he got convicted in 2005
until now,

he's had the opportunity to plead
guilty to this and he's refused.

Part of the parole board hearings,
I think,

is "Would you accept your guilt?"

And if people can come to terms
and accept their guilt,

it's a good mark for them
for getting parole,

but Luke's determined
not to do that.

É

F

é

%

é

With no forensic evidence against
Luke Mitchell,

police turned their attention
to eyewitness evidence

linking him to Jodi just before
she was murdered.

Identification.

That's the crux of things.

If someone's been identified,

you can't get any better evidence
than identification.

Local woman Andrina Bryson came
forward during the investigation.

She had driven past a young couple
at the entrance to the path

just before the murder.

She said she was driving
through Easthouses

towards Newtongrange
and came around a sharp bend.

There was a girl standing
on the pavement and a guy

in the entrance track as she drove
around this sharp bend.

She identified Luke Mitchell as
the male from a photographic line-up

shown to her by police.

Andrina Bryson's evidence
is probably the most critical,

in terms of the conviction.

The former detectives will now
recreate Andrina Bryson's journey

and re-examine her
eyewitness evidence.

Right, John, so that's us.
We've confirmed the route.

And that's the same route
as Andrina Bryson drove.

It's basically a test to see what
you would actually see

driving at 30 mile per hour.

They place a young couple to stand
in the exact position on the path

as described by Andrina Bryson
in her statement.

Put your back to the cars

and I want you to look over
your right shoulder.

We've got a young a female member
of my family who's similar in age

to Andrina Bryson was at the time.

Neve's totally unaware of
the whole inquiry,

the whole Jodi Jones murder.

She was too young at the time
to know anything about it.

And all she's aware of today is that
she's going to be driving that car.

That's all she's been asked to do.

Right, and we're off.

So you've never been to this area of
Edinburgh before, Neve?

No. Right.

I want you to stand with your hands
like that, OK?

The car will come down the hill
past Zoe.

And I want you to look as if you're
having a conversation with her, OK?

We're going to drive our route
that Andrina Bryson drove.

And at the end of that,
John's going to ask Neve questions

in relation to what happened
during the drive on that route.

You're going left at
the bottom here.

Right. Neve, you've been on
that route.

Is there anything you've seen?
Did anything stand out?

OK, that's fine.
We're going to do it again.

Right.

She's obviously aware now that she's
got to be looking for something,

so we'll see if she sees anything
this time.

Turn left. Next left, Neve.

Hi, Neve.
That's your second run.

This time, did you see anything
out of the ordinary?

F

That's fine.

Third time. OK? thank you.

We've sort of proven here that there's nothing
that's particularly drawn Neve's attention

to the couple, so we're going to do it a third
time and I'm going to point them out to her.

Right, so we'll do the same again.

Let's run number three, Neve.

And for this one, I'm going to sit
in the front with you. OK?

Same as before, just...

Same directions.

All right, Neve. Have a wee chat
with your pal.

That's the experiment finished.

Third time lucky.

Was there anything that stood out
for you?

F

F

Can you describe them?

F

F

F

é

%

Quite short. What colour hair?

Did you get a look at
the man's face?

É

What can you remember about it?

He wasn't happy.

Any features of his face
you can remember?

É

He was clean-shaven, didn't have
a beard. Describe her again.

É

é

And they were having a discussion?

Heated discussion? Right, OK.

When you first described
the female...

...you said she had blonde hair
and then you said you had brown.

So was it blonde or brown?

Thanks, Neve.

Having carried out
this experiment today,

I think it adds a wee bit of doubt
to Andrina Bryson's statement

and how much she's actually seen.

The bottom line is she's drove
by the first time

and there's nothing that's thrown
her attention to the couple

standing up the lane.

So whatever's drawn
Andrina Bryson's attention to it,

considering there was not much going
on other than a couple talking,

I really don't know.

The problem with eyewitness
statements is, good as they are,

some of the best evidence
you can get,

eyewitnesses are influenced.

The moment I leaned forward and
became agitated and suggested

that the couple were having
an argument,

that coloured Neve's perception
of that version of events,

which then affects her statement
to John.

18 months after identifying
Luke Mitchell

as the male on the path,

the prosecution called Andrina
Bryson to testify at his trial.

Andrina Bryson's asked,

"Is the person you saw that day in
this courtroom? Can you see him?"

She says... She can't identify him.

LUKE: That was a big moment for me.

There's been pictures of this guy
in the media

for the best part of 19 months.

And when he's standing there
in front of her,

in court, she can't identify him.

And she was the prosecution's
star witness.

The present day re-examination
has now uncovered

another line of inquiry
and more potential suspects.

There's a great deal of irony here
that Luke was the only suspect.

He was only ever the only suspect.

There was nobody else treated
as a suspect

or considered as a suspect.

And yet...

...you didn't have to look
very far back then for other people

that should at least have been
persons of interest.

I think we need to take a look
at these two -

the Moped Boys.

Gordon Dickie and John Ferris?

Aye. The moped...
Apparently it's a home-made moped.

It's not got a silencer fitted.

There's numerous witnesses speak to
hearing this moped

running about the area of the path
between the two,

Newburgh and Easthouses.

Just a short time later, we've got
a witness who sees the moped

against the wall, right at the V in
the wall in the crime scene, right?

Sees the moped leaning against
the wall but doesn't see them there.

What time is that at? 5:15.

The exact time that Jodi
was murdered.

According to the prosecution's case.

So we've got those two,
seen at five o'clock,

their moped seen at the V at 5.15.

They're nowhere to be seen
afterJodi's been murdered. Yeah.

That's kind of bizarre.

Following appeals by police,

the "Moped Boys" came forward
five days after the murder.

One of the boys was Jodi's cousin,
John Ferris.

This is Jodi's cousin

and he takes five days
to come forward.

Why would he do that?

The police were appealing for
anybody that was on the path,

or roundabout, between five and ten
o'clock that night to come forward

and just be eliminated.

And these two didn't do that.

The Moped Boys were called
as witnesses during the trial.

They were asked where they were

when the bike was propped against
the wall without them -

because the witness could only see
the bike, no people -

and they said
they couldn't remember.

They couldn't remember
where they were.

They couldn't remember
what they were doing.

Most of their evidence was they
couldn't remember anything

about that day.

We then find out that one of them,
John Ferris, hacked all his hair off

by himself, with scissors...

...the day after the murder.

In a dramatic moment
during their testimony,

the Moped Boys both denied
murdering Jodi.

Defence actually put the questions
to them directly,

"Did you killJodi?" Directly.

And obviously, they both said no.

OK, this is Judge Nimmo Smith,
names them and says it was clear

they were in the firing line
but points out that neither

was actually accused outright
of murder.

That's because they were just asked.

Do you know the difference
with that?

They've got to say, "I put it to you
that you did murderJodi Jones,"

instead of saying, "Did you murder
Jodi Jones?"

When someone's convicted and
that conviction is questionable,

and you look back and say,
"Oh, yeah,

"they questioned him and
they put that all over the papers,

"but they didn't question
these people and nobody asked why."

I didn't meet Luke until about
eight weeks afterJodi was murdered.

So, let's see.

In 2003, my future
was alternative health.

Never in a million years
would I have believed

that I would end up taking
a completely different route -

studying the law, learning about
wrongful convictions

and ending up doing a PhD
in criminology.

This case took me in a completely
different direction.

Sandra Lean has continued to legally
challenge the police treatment

of Luke Mitchell during
the murder investigation

as grounds for a miscarriage
of justice.

Luke had just turned 15 when he was
detained on August 14th, 2003.

Detained. He wasn't arrested.

But he was taken to the police
station and questioned for hours

with no lawyer present.

He asked for his mum and they
wouldn't let him speak to her.

He asked for a lawyer and they told
him he wasn't entitled to one.

Do you get the idea, Luke?

Everybody's speaking about you
carrying knives.

We've got all these people
talking to the fact

that you're a violent laddie,
a violent laddie, OK?

You're a violent boy, OK?

F

F

é

%

Three years later, Lord Justice
General Lord Hamilton

described the police officer's
conduct as "outrageous".

"At times, the nature of
the questioning was such

"that the questioner did not seem
to be seriously interested

"in a response from the appellant,

"but rather endeavouring
to break him down

"into giving some
hoped-for confession

"by his overbearing and
hostile interrogation."

Interrogation.

"Such conduct, particularly
where the interviewee

"was a 15-year-old youth,

"can only be deplored."

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review
Commission concluded in 2014

that Luke Mitchell's human rights
had been infringed

during this interview.

F

é

F

£

With their re-examination of
the case drawing to a close,

the former detectives
review the evidence so far.

During the course of investigation,

we've uncovered what we would regard
as a number of potential suspects

that are basically in the same
category as Luke Mitchell.

So what we intend to do today,
Mick and I,

is we're going to go through each
one at a time and we'll apply things

like motive, ability,
identification, etc.

It's a tool that detectives
have used for a long time

and it's been very effective in
some very high-profile murder cases.

Right, Mick.

Steven Kelly. Steven Kelly -
Jodi's sister's boyfriend.

Identification. With blood found on
the T-shirt that contained...

...Steven Kelly's DNA.

É

F

And the DNA related to Steven Kelly.

Janine's boyfriend.
Janine's boyfriend.

He then changed his statement,
and by the time it got to court,

it was totally different from
the statement

he provided at the start.

In the first statement, he said
that Luke's dog, Mia,

was sniffing the air
and was alerted to something.

But then in the statement
he used at court,

the dog didn't sniff the air
and Luke went straight to the V.

And it makes it look as if Luke knew
where the body was.

The condom man.

F

He would've been
as strong a suspect,

if not a stronger suspect
than Luke Mitchell.

F

F

Next, we've got Gordon Dickie
and John Ferris,

the two that we've referred to
as the Moped Boys.

John Ferris, a relative of
Jodi's family,

puts hisself on the path at the time
of the murder.

His moped's seen at the time of
the murder,

near to the murder scene.

É

F

He changes his appearance after
the murder. He cuts his hair.

F

Opportunity.
Both had the opportunity.

They both know the area very well.

They'd know how to get away from
the locus of the murder quickly.

É

F

Mark Kane.

Stays nearby the locus.

He stays in the college, which is
not far from the locus.

He habitually carries a knife.

Next day, he turns up at
his pal's house, Scott Forbes.

So he's left the area, he's got
injuries, scratches to his face,

redness to his eyes.

He's the closest to the locus.
It's just directly across a field.

It's covert. You can't...
You're out of sight.

Oh, definitely.

We come to the last person
we're going to speak about today,

and it's probably our biggest
person of interest

from the whole re-investigation
John and I have carried out.

This one...
This person features massively.

He did feature at the time of
the inquiry with the police,

but for whatever reason, it didn't
seem to go any further

and his name never came out.

For various reasons, like I've said,

we can't name that individual
just now.

We could go further,
but we've got to be careful.

Let's put it this way - when we
started this investigation,

he was in the periphery.

But the further we went into it,
the more he came to the fore.

And he's now sitting here as our
strongest potential suspect.

I believe he's right up there.

É

F

£

é

F

é

Journalist Bob Smith has sparked
new interest in the case

and convinced the Mail on Sunday
to pick up the story.

What made you get interested
in the Luke Mitchell case?

F

é

é

£

F

é

£

F

é

F

é

F

%

é

£

é

F

F

His alibi was me, obviously,
because he was in the house with me.

Because I was working full-time,

obviously I had to get help
with chores. That was his chore.

Majority of the times,
he cooked the evening meal.

É

é

é

F

é

F

é

F

In February 2012,

Corrine Mitchell took
the lie detector test

and agreed for the results to be
published in the Mail on Sunday.

I faced numerous accusations -

one of them being that
I actually did the murder,

another one being that Luke did the
murder and I helped him clean up,

I'd burned all his bloodied clothing
in my log burner.

É

£

é

F

é

F

é

é

Nine weeks later,
from inside prison,

Luke Mitchell also took
the lie detector test.

Corrine Mitchell had sensationally
passed a lie detector test.

Luke Mitchell requested that he also
be allowed to take the test

from inside prison.

F

F

F

F

F

The polygraph examiner tells
Luke Mitchell to close his eyes,

to block out distractions
from the prison floor.

F

é

é

You, as a professionaljournalist,

you deal with people
telling you the truth

and telling you lies regularly.

As a whole, right from the start,

what's your opinion on
Luke Mitchell?

F

é

é

é

F

F

F

F

é

é

I'm going to go down and
check on Corrine again.

I did speak with her last night,

but her health has deteriorated
so badly over the last few months.

Every time I go down, every time
she doesn't answer the phone,

every time I leave,

it terrifies me that that's going to
be the last time,

and that next time...

...she's not going to be there

or I'm going to go down
and find her dead.

She's been a figure
of so much hate...

...in this area for so long.

How are you feeling?

Right?

Are you back at the hospital...?

É

F

Freezing in here, Corrine.

Absolutely freezing, it is.

F

F

Well, not too many people
have to do that.

Even Luke's got heat and water.

F

Has a toilet, yeah.

£

Yeah.

THEY LAUGH

F

é

F

é

F

é

SHE COUGHS

é

é

This is where we started
our investigation,

and we're now at the end.

Every time you come back here,
it's a horrible feeling of dread.

What happened here
was beyond terrible -

a 14-year-old girl murdered.

I do believe Luke Mitchell suffered
a serious miscarriage ofjustice

and was let down by
the legal system.

And he was also, in my opinion,
let down by a jury.

I can't understand how they could
find him guilty

beyond reasonable doubt
at that trial.

I would take it one step further.

27 years as a police officer, my gut
instinct has never let me down.

I'm not based on my opinion or my
assumptions on a gut instinct alone,

but on the investigation
we've carried out here.

In my opinion, Luke Mitchell did not
commit this crime and he's innocent.

É

F

é

é

Until we have answers to all
the questions surrounding this case,

this case will never go away.

Luke Mitchell's defence team
have lodged three appeals

between 2008 and 2011,

all of which have been rejected.

So many lives were destroyed here.

Jodi lost her life,

but so many others have lost so much

because the truth's just never
been found.

É

é

é

F

é

F

F

Subtitles by Red Bee Media