Teenage killer led back to cells after bid to overturn conviction
Mother of mutilated Jodi Jones tells of relief outside court
Published:
The mother of murdered schoolgirl Jodi Jones spoke of her relief yesterday after her daughter’s killer failed in a bid to have his conviction overturned.
Luke Mitchell, now 19, was locked up for life in 2005 for the “truly evil” murder of his 14-year-old girlfriend.
Jodi was stripped, tied up and stabbed to death before her mutilated body was dumped in woods near her home at Dalkeith, Midlothian, almost five years ago.
Mitchell’s lawyers claimed their client did not get a fair trial and was the victim of a miscarriage of justice.
Three senior judges rejected his appeal yesterday.
Jodi’s mother, Judith, covered her mouth with her hands as the judges announced their decision at the Appeal Court in Edinburgh.
As she left court, she said she felt “relief, total relief”.
Asked her reaction to the ruling, she said: “Brilliant.”
Mitchell’s mother, Corinne, remained defiant. “Luke’s innocent,” she said. “The fight goes on.”
Mitchell showed no emotion as he sat in the dock.
Defence lawyers had put forward six grounds of appeal but they were all rejected by Lord Justice General Lord Hamilton, sitting with Lords Osborne and Kingarth.
Lawyers also argued that if no one particular ground of appeal was sufficient to overturn the conviction, they were strong enough when taken together.
Lord Hamilton said: “While there may be cases where the combined effect of a series of unsatisfactory features in a trial may result in a miscarriage of justice, we are not persuaded that this is such a case.”
Jodi was murdered on June 30, 2003.
Prosecutors at the trial said it was “the most gruesome killing of recent years”.
Mitchell, from Dalkeith, was convicted in 2005.
The teenager, 14 at the time of the murder, was ordered to spend a minimum of 20 years behind bars.
Defence counsel Donald Findlay QC told the 10-day appeal there was an “enduring sense of unease”.
He argued that there was insufficient evidence to find his client guilty and that police made errors as they investigated the case. The lawyer also claimed Mitchell did not get a fair trial because his case had been heard too close to the crime scene.
The Crown insisted its case was “compelling, cogent and almost irresistible”.
Lord Hamilton said yesterday the court was satisfied there was “sufficient evidence” for a guilty verdict. He said a key witness helped destroy Mitchell’s alibi that he was at home at the time.
The judge added that the absence of any signs of a struggle at the scene suggested Jodi could have been there with someone she knew – such as Mitchell, whom she had gone to meet.
Lord Hamilton pointed to the disappearance of Mitchell’s jacket and a knife he carried as being “significant”.
He added: “The appellant’s (Mitchell’s) conduct later that evening was also significant, not least in the apparent ease with which he was able to identify the location of the body in relatively dense woodland.”
The judges criticised the “outrageous” way a police officer had interviewed Mitchell – who was then 15 – in August 2003.
Lord Hamilton said: “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.”
However, they added that they were not persuaded this resulted in a miscarriage of justice. The judges also rejected claims that Mitchell could not get a fair hearing in Edinburgh, where the original trial was held. They also dismissed arguments that it was unfair for jurors to hear that Mitchell kept bottles of urine in his bedroom.
The teen’s appeal against sentence has to be decided.
Readers' Comments