Just as the toxic culture of sexual abuse at the Metropolitan Police is highlighted, we again remind that it was a female one-time school chum of noxious nonce Ghislaine Maxwell, Dame Cressida Dick, who presided over this rotten organisation for much of this period
“Do you feel safe around the police?” enquired Emma Barnett on BBC Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour this morning specifically in the context of the latest Metropolitan policeman-rapist David Carrick – a now convicted criminal who should never have passed vetting in the first place given accusations against him prior to and during his appointment.
Ms Barnett was right to ask such, but what she very clearly missed was to observe was that the very person at the helm of this police force during much of Carrick’s time committing many of his crimes was a woman, Dame Cressida Dick DBE QPM.
Currently there are about 1,000 allegations of domestic abuse or sexual offences against the Met’s 45,000 officers and staff and yet again today it has been highlighted that criminal conduct within this force has again and again been ignored. “How can it have failed again?” raged former chief constable of Nottinghamshire Sue Fish in today’s The Guardian and going further, she quite sensibly added: “If police are abusing their position to exploit those they are charged to protect, how can the institution be trusted?” She is correct and now the powers must be must put this grave situation right.
Turning back more specifically to the now put-out-to-paddock Dame Cressida, the Daily Mail’s Richard Eden highlighted another scandal in which she failed to act forcefully – that of the ‘Partygate’ probe into Boris Johnson and his cronies ‘living-it-large’ at Downing Street during COVID-19 lockdowns. Eden observed:
“Commander Catherine Roper, who has been confirmed as Wiltshire’s new Chief Constable, was previously in charge of the ‘Partygate’ probe into Covid breaches in Downing Street. She was given the role by Cressida Dick. In her new job, Roper will have to look after several well-known Wiltshire dignitaries – including Dick, who has a home in the county. Small world, isn’t it?”
Dame Cressida’s cronyism and curious connections have repeatedly been examined in The Steeple Times. She went to the same school as the convicted sex trafficker Ghislaine Maxwell, Oxford High School, at the same time as her and attended the same college at the University of Oxford, Balliol. Dame Cressida’s father, Marcus Dick (1920 – 1971) just happened also to be the senior tutor at Balliol College also and in 1994, when the Metropolitan Police could have pursued allegations that Maxwell was operating an upmarket brothel from her Stanhope Mews East, South Kensington, London home, the force did nothing. Paraphrasing Richard Eden: “Strange that, isn’t it?”
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
Pictured Top (left to right) – Continually criticised ex-Met Police chief Dame Cressida Dick, convicted sex offender David Carrick and convicted sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell.
Rotten to its core… Wayne Couzens and David Carrick are just two examples of sex fiends who were allowed free reign to commit crimes whilst working for the Metropolitan Police. It is now time that this force be stopped from “marking its own homework” has been an analysis repeatedly stated in the hours since the conviction of Carrick.Richard Eden’s feature this morning highlighted a bit more of “jobs for the girls” going on with the appointment of Catherine Roper as Wiltshire’s new chief constable.Both Ghislaine Maxwell and Dame Cressida Dick grew up and were educated in the ‘City of Dreaming Spires.’ Though Dame Cressida does not appear in the former’s address book, their connections during their formative years surely must have meant that their paths crossed – especially since the former Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis’ father was the senior tutor at the very college, Balliol, where both ladies studied.Since dead sex fiend Jeffrey Epstein and his since incarcerated co-collaborator sex fiend Ghislaine Maxwell (left), one-time alleged brothel owned by Maxwell between 1989 and 1997, 69 Stanhope Mews East in South Kensington (centre) and Maxwell’s former schoolmate and now ex-Met Police chief Dame Cressida Dick (right).69 Stanhope Mews East, South Kensington, London, SW7 5QT was the subject of a covert surveillance exercise by the Metropolitan Police in 1994 whilst under the ownership of the pension pot plundering ‘Cap’n Bob’s’ decidedly deviant daughter. Very young ladies of a certain type were seen coming and going during the period and it was suspected by neighbours that the house was being operated as a “high-class whore house” run by a “smart looking madam.”The current occupants of 69 Stanhope Mews are clearly sick of media attention and in spite of the mews house being on a public highway recently placed a “no photography or video recording” sign in their window. They also have a problem with dogs peeing on their plant pots.
As more documents about Jeffrey Epstein and his cohorts are unsealed in New York, could there be a bumpy ride ahead for ‘Devil’s Advocate’ Alan Dershowitz? Will Ghislaine Maxwell cough up names and will those she trafficked to be brought to justice?
On Monday in New York, after further documents relating to the filthy activities of the noxious nonces Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell were unsealed, the tables yet again turned for the notable ‘Devil’s Advocate’ Alan Dershowitz.
Fresh from having – if you believe the narrative of him reaching an ‘agreement’ with Virginia Roberts Giuffre as a simple “dismissed with prejudice and without costs or award of fees to either party” in November – trouble, it seems, is again brewing for this anything but fresh-faced and anything but private lawyer.
Now, 84-year-old Dershowitz – a man best known for having not only represented Epstein, but also famed for his associations with other ‘notorious’ and very rich clients including Claus von Bülow, Patty Hearst, Leona Helmsley, O. J. Simpson, Donald Trump, Mike Tyson and Harvey Weinstein – has to face up to the problems the unsealing of transcripts, emails and photographs from the 2017 deposition of Epstein-Maxwell victim Sarah Ransome might bring.
Dershowitz – who not only lived-it-up with Epstein in his mansion in his notorious camera filled ‘Paedo Palace’ in Lenox Hill, New York over the years, but whom also visited his ‘Paedo Pad’ in Palm Beach and the ‘Paedo Islands’ of Little and Great St James’s in the Caribbean as well – became most definitely publicly associated with the since croaked paedophile in 2000 when he “served as a character witness for the reclusive financier.” The pair, however, had supposedly first met in the summer of 1996 at a party given by (Lady) Lynn Forester de Rothschild – a close mate of another Epstein chum, Lord (Peter) Mandelson – on Martha’s Vineyard for her since deceased husband, Sir Evelyn de Rothschild (1931 – 2022).
At that time, Dershowitz described “enthralling” Epstein as “feisty” and “utterly politically incorrect… interesting to be with.” Subsequently, after the duo spent time together at Harvard, the self-declared and since retired “eminent Harvard professor” became the lawyer for Epstein after a 2005 investigation into allegations involving young girls in Palm Beach.
“One of Jeffrey Epstein’s victims has claimed that he did make sex tapes of his wealthy friends – and not only has she seen them, she’s made copies.”
“And Sarah Ransome’s newly released deposition has rekindled allegations that top attorney Alan Dershowitz was involved in the abuse of underage girls.”
“Ransome claimed in the deposition taken as part of a lawsuit that Virginia Giuffre filed against Epstein’s one-time girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell that she has seen footage of two of Epstein’s associates having sex with a female victim.”
Whilst Ransome “even claims to have copies which she has stored at several secure locations around Europe,” Dershowitz responded by “denying any abuse” and claiming “the stories are all made up.”
Continuing, Bates added:
“The theory about the tapes has been fueled by two of Epstein’s victims, Maria Farmer and Giuffre, who claim that they saw a room full of CCTV monitors at Epstein’s $65million mansion in New York – including some showing cameras in the toilets.”
“When police raided Epstein’s mansion in 2019 they found dozens of tapes of girls in a twisted library the disgraced financier kept.”
“Maxwell appeared to have admitted the tapes existed after being tricked by a journalist for the TV show 60 Minutes, telling him: ‘I don’t know where they are.’”
“According to the deposition, among the men that Ransome claims she was forced to have sex with was Epstein’s former lawyer Alan Dershowitz. She described him as ‘quite an elderly man, wore glasses, quite pasty, pasty-skinned.’”
Now, as the rabbit hole that is the saga of still-living Ghislaine Maxwell keeps on unravelling, one is simply left asking: “Will this mucky madam ever actually cough up the names of those she sex trafficked too?”
As review of her sentence approaches in January, the clock is ticking, but still the pension pot plunderer’s daughter remains silent. It seems astounding, but one thing’s for clear; as her own pension pot plundering father once said: “I have a beautiful daughter and she’s just like me.” As we have emphasized before, the word “beautiful” should simply replaced with “deviant.”
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
Pictured Top – ‘The look of smug’ – Jeffrey Epstein smirks as the lawyer he shared with Donald Trump gazes at him with dollar signs in his eyes; whilst alive, Epstein’s multiple legal woes most definitely kept Alan Dershowitz in work.
As much as the so-called ‘Devil’s Advocate’ might like now to forget it, it is clear that he and Jeffrey Epstein enjoyed one another’s company on multiple occasions. Their facial expressions in the snaps shared together are clearly telling of friendship and association, if nothing else. Newly revealed documentation includes imagery of both Sarah Ransome (supposedly naked other than her towel) and Jeffrey Epstein visiting the ‘Paedo Islands’ at the same time.Other imagery, from Little St James Island in 2006, shows mucky madam and now convicted sex offender Ghislaine Maxwell as being present there also.Alan Dershowitz visited Jefferey Epstein’s ‘Paedo Palace’ at 9 East 71st Street, Lenox Hill, New York, NY 10021 on a number of occasions, but what he actually did or didn’t do there is now again a question of dispute.Jeffrey Epstein’s Caribbean islands were places Alan Dershowitz seemingly very happily went to. Pictured here on one of them with his so-called ‘assistant’ Sarah Kellen, the since croaked paedophile Epstein’s lawyer was alleged by Virginia Roberts Giuffre to have had sex with her there. Though these have since been ‘forgotten’ by Roberts Giuffre, there are now questions about whether anything went on between Dershowitz and Sarah Ransome there.The ending of the Giuffre v Dershowitz case did not change the fact that the plaintiff was abused by numerous others and that she and numerous others were abused by Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell and their numerous cohorts. It is time that these famous faces were named and shamed and brought to justice. Will that now happen? As unlikely as it currently seems, stranger things have happened.Emmy Tayler, the Oxford born secretary from 1997 to 2001 of Ghislaine Maxwell, is no doubt spitting feathers over the latest unsealing of evidence relating to those she used to be involved with.According to a tweet sent from an account going by the name of @CultStateDotCom on 1st December 2021 and taken from flight records that have been disputed by some, Ghislaine Maxwell’s PA Emmy Tayler flew on Epstein’s planes 190 times whilst the since croaked paedophile’s PA Sarah Kellen took 350 flights. His former girlfriend, Eva Andersson Dubin, took ‘just’ 36 flights whilst the since croaked paedophile sex trafficker Jean-Luc Brunel is said to have taken 34 flights, Gleen Dubin 27 and President Bill Clinton an astonishing 26.Fresh from being interviewed by ‘Vanity Fair’s’ Mark Seal about Ghislaine Maxwell in July 2020, Eton and Cambridge educated financier Euan Rellie took to Twitter in the wake of Alan Dershowitz’s controversial “everyone should keep an open mind about [Ghislaine] Maxwell [prior to her trial]” ‘Spectator’ article. Rellie quite correctly observed: “This guy @AlanDersh is protesting way too much.”In November, Bill Clinton was confronted by a journalist named Juan Mendoza who subsequently shared the clip he filmed on Twitter. Mendoza accompanied it with commentary that read: “Do you have comments on the alleged – allegation of your connection with Jeffrey Epstein?” In the video footage, very clearly the 42nd POTUS bizarrely burst out laughing and answered: “I think the evidence is clear.”‘Power connectors’ Sir Evelyn and Lady de Rothschild with Bill and Hillary Clinton. Here are power broking people whose address books include everyone from paedophiles to princes.Lady de Rothschild’s one-time chum Jeffrey Epstein living-it-up with their mutual chum, the then plain old Peter Mandelson at his ‘Paris Paedo Pad’ circa 20th January 2007 – just months after the former had been charged with soliciting a woman for prostitution in August 2006 – as his diminutive butler Valdson Viera Cotrin looks on. Mr Mandelson was elevated to become the far grander Baron Mandelson of Foy in the County of Herefordshire and of Hartlepool in the County of Durham (courtesy of Gordon Brown) on 13th October 2008 subsequently.Amongst those Ghislaine Maxwell made connections with in Oxford, the city where she grew up and was educated, were Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his journalist sister, Rachel Johnson. In November 2021, in ‘The Spectator,’ Ms Johnson remarked: “It’s hard not to feel a batsqueak of pity for Ghislaine Maxwell… As a fresher I wandered into Balliol JCR one day in search of its subsidised breakfast granola-and-Nescafé offering and found a shiny glamazon with naughty eyes holding court astride a table, a high-heeled boot resting on my brother Boris’s thigh. She gave me a pitying glance but I did manage to snag an invite to her party in Headington Hill Hall – even though I wasn’t in the same college as her and Boris. I have a memory of her father, Bob, coming out in a towelling robe and telling us all to go home. I’m sure fairweather friends would not reveal they went to a Ghislaine Maxwell party: as Barbara Amiel’s brilliant memoir ‘Friends and Enemies’ proves, you only know who your real chums are when you’re in the gutter.” One is left wondering what the pugnacious pair of Johnsons might have to say of Mr Dershowitz in the coming weeks.Bizarrely, clearly attempting to distract from developments in his own life, Dershowitz took to Twitter late Tuesday and shared a link to a podcast he’d made about a Ponzi scheming who seemingly has plundered even bigger numbers than his late mate Epstein. He asked: “Is Sam Bankman-Fried really guilty?” Perhaps the ‘Devil’s Advocate’ might do better to instead focus on his own issues-in-hand than to meddle in matters he has no control or involvement in (as of yet).
Alan Dershowitz was played by Ron Silver in the 1990 American drama film ‘Reversal of Fortune’ with Jeremy Irons as Claus von Bülow and Glenn Close as Sunny von Bülow. The 111-minute film grossed £12.3 million at the box office and was lauded for its “exceptional performances” and “cunning script.” Will the ‘Devil’s Advocate’ himself be able to be quite so cunning as we move into 2023?
As it is revealed that Scottish police disgracefully destroyed evidence in the Luke Mitchell case, we highlight two other equally shocking examples of police evidence destruction and call for reinvestigations of all three cases
Last night, in what he justifiably called a “bombshell” and announced as an “exclusive,” The Scottish Sun’s Douglas Walker revealed that Luke Mitchell, convicted of killing his girlfriend Jodi Jones in Dalkeith, Midloathian in 2003, “could sue prosecutors after it emerged they sanctioned the police to destroy evidence from the murder case.”
According to the paper:
“Cops illicitly destroyed protected evidence from the Jodi Jones murder case, we can reveal. More than 100 legal productions including burnt clothes were secretly uplifted for disposal – against police rules.”
“Now it’s emerged that Mitchell’s legal team could sue prosecutors after it emerged they sanctioned the police to destroy evidence from the murder case.”
“An insider revealed he could argue his right to an appeal has been hampered with Crown Office lawyers now desperate for assurances he won’t take them to court.”
“A letter from the Lord Advocate’s government solicitors admitted the evidence had been taken away – and confirmed destruction had now been halted.”
Continuing, “an insider told The Scottish Sun” that:
“A load of officers from the Major Investigation Team went to Edinburgh to remove over 100 productions. This included some burnt clothes found about a thousand metres from the locus.”
“They loaded boxes into a police van and took them to Livingston police station. The Crown Office had signed off the items to be returned to the owner or destroyed. This is not normal procedure, especially in a murder case.”
“Mitchell could now argue his right to a fair appeal has been denied as evidence has been destroyed. This could lead to a judicial review which could even pave a way to his release.”
In the case of Bamber, critical evidence was burnt in the garden of White House Farm and taken home by officers by Essex Police even and in a further example, that of Mark Alexander, who has been in jail for killing his conman father since 2010, it was just as bad.
Found guilty without any forensic evidence and with the help of Midsomer Murders-esque “suspicious neighbours primarily, supporters of Alexander rightly highlight that the prosecution withheld critical information from trial that included that four potential suspects – who police never bothered to speak to – were never even mentioned to the jury.
Going further and summing up what led to the conviction of Alexander, Progressing Prisoners Maintaining Innocence (PPMI), observed: “Another example of typical factors in a wrongful conviction: no forensic evidence, impossible time frame for the crime to be committed, witness put off by the police, important witnesses not interviewed, lurid allegations in the press published before they could be countered, all racked up by such sad personal circumstances.”
It is time for all three cases to be revisited and at the very least those officers that destroyed key documents and items must be quite rightly be brought to book. Justice is never just if it is based on the police manipulating the evidence that gets that very justice.
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
Pictured Top – Left to right: Luke Mitchell, Jeremy Bamber and Mark Alexander; three men who remain in prison and convicted of murder in spite of there being significant evidence of police mishandling of evidence in each of their unlinked cases.
Evidence Destruction By Police – Campaigns Supporting Mark Alexander, Jeremy Bamber and Luke Mitchell
Here are three men who continue to rot in prison. Each may or may not be guilty of the murders they were convicted of committing. However, though, the protests of innocence of each man should be judged on the merits and failings of each case alone, what links these three men is that the police very, very clearly shockingly botched the handling of evidence that led to each of their convictions.
Each man – Mark Alexander, Jeremy Bamber and Luke Mitchell – as a result of a questioning public and critical experts highlighting the flaws in their cases, has attracted large support. More details about the campaigns seeking reinvestigations into each of their cases follows:
MARK ALEXANDER – Convicted of the murder of his father in 2010; has never ceased maintaining his innocence
To follow the ‘Justice for Mark Alexander’ group on Facebook, click here, and to follow the campaign seeking a review of the case on Twitter go to @PatientCaptive. Prominent supporters include the former Conservative MP for Westminster The Rt. Hon. Mark Field, the Reverend Canon Grant Fellows, the Right Reverend Bishop Tim Stevens and the hostage-turned-humanitarian Terry Waite CBE
JEREMY BAMBER – Convicted of murder of 5 members of his family in 1986; has never ceased maintaining his innocence
To learn more about the Jeremy Bamber Innocence Campaign – whose supporters number former MP Andrew Hunter, barrister Flo Krause, human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell and magistrate Lady Waterlow – and to join those calling for a reinvestigation of this case, click here. Follow on Twitter at @BamberTweets and join the ‘Jeremy Bamber Justice Group’ by clicking here.
LUKE MITCHELL – Convicted of the murder of his girlfriend in 2005; has never ceased maintaining his innocence
To join the official Facebook group focused on highlighting the supposed flaws in the police investigation that led to the conviction of Luke Mitchell, click here. To join the 25,400 people who have already signed the Change.org petition requesting a “full, independent review” of the Luke Mitchell case, click here.
Earlier this month, Tom Halliday (pictured), a Midlothian car mechanic turned bathroom designer and fitter, revealed that he found a knife in a skip just 500 yards from where the body of schoolgirl Jodi Jones was found just days after her 30th June 2003 murder. He reported it the police and spoke out again now after recently finding out that his find was never even mentioned let alone submitted during the trial. Mr Halliday commented: “Nobody placed any importance on that knife. When I learned it wasn’t documented, it raised my suspicions the police may have tried to conceal the discovery.” Going further, a lawyer for Luke Mitchell, Scott Forbes, added: “This is the real missing knife… It was either destroyed went missing if it didn’t fit the police narrative.”Amongst items not only never shown to the court at the trial of Jeremy Bamber was this bible. Though photographed by Essex Police at the crime scene next to the body of Sheila Caffell – the only other suspect in these familial murders – it was shockingly destroyed. “What motivated officers to do this?” remains a question that very clearly ought to be answered.In April 2020, ‘The Steeple Times’ reported that “further questions about the conduct of Essex Police [were] raised as it [was] revealed they destroyed the bible, nightclothes and pillows that were found with the victims at White House Farm on the night of the 1985 murders. The 20th March 2000 letter from the Criminal Cases Review Commission to Glaisyers Solicitors LLP and Sheila Caffell is truly a shocking example of a bungling balls-up.Of how the police handled the investigation into his father’s murder in 2009 and the discovery of his body subsequently at his home at 2 Prospect Close, Drayton Parslow, Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, MK17 0JB, Mark Alexander observed: “Once I was in their sights, things went downhill pretty quickly. Supporting testimony offered by my mum in police interview wasn’t shared with my defence team. Samples taken at the burial site weren’t bagged correctly, so degraded in transit before they could ever be tested. When I gave officers a list of dad’s aliases, the leads weren’t followed. And despite there being no sign of the murder itself having taken place at the house, no efforts were made to search the local area for clues. Instead of being guided by the facts, the facts were reinterpreted to fit the suspect, me. The pathology reports gave a two-month window within which dad’s death might have occurred. Everything then focused on fixing the murder as close as possible to the beginning of that window in order to provide me with just enough time and motive to render what they already believed to be true plausible. It was classic confirmation bias.”
‘The Steeple Times’ backs respected humanitarian Terry Waite CBE’s calls for a review “without further delay” of the conviction of Mark Alexander; the now 35-year-old was found guilty of killing his conman father on “circumstantial evidence alone” in 2010
Mark Alexander has been a prisoner for more than 12 years, but was deemed to exhibit “no historic or current issues of concern” after completing 45-hours of therapy and counselling in October 2015. In September 2018, the Offender Assessment System observed he had shown “no evidence of negative or pro-criminal attitudes,” yet simply because he has refused to take a guilty plea, a 2-years and 8-months (16%) penalty was added to his sentence in September 2010.
Subsequently, in spite of being recommended for being transferred to an open prison in October 2021 and March 2022 at Sentence Planning Review Meetings (SPRM), Alexander currently remains in closed conditions because the Public Protection Casework Section (PPCS) has deemed his maintenance of his innocence undermines “public confidence” in the justice system.
When The Steeple Times first delved into this case in May 2020, we asked: “Could Mark Alexander be innocent?” In our article, we highlighted flaws with the safety of the conviction of a law student currently locked up for 16 years for supposedly murdering his 70-year-old “controlling” conman father, Samuel Alexander, in Buckinghamshire on a date unknown between September 2009 and February 2010. The then 22-year-old Mr Alexander was found guilty “by a majority verdict and on the basis of circumstantial evidence only” in September 2010.
Yesterday, sharing his continuing belief that there has been shown to be “further doubt on the safety” of this conviction, a message was shared from the greatly respected humanitarian Terry Waite CBE on the Twitter handle that communicates the “thoughts and journey” of Mark Alexander via “tweets from prison via letter.”
In it, this “long-standing advocate for justice in Mark’s case” suggested: “[This] case certainly raises reasonable doubt in my mind, and ought to be reviewed without further delay.”
The full text of Mr Waite’s missive follows below. It is well worth reading.
Mark Alexander (left) in happier times prior to his September 2010 and Terry Waite CBE’s 22nd November 2022 missive sharing his views on why he views this case needs to be “reviewed without further delay.”
Terry Waite CBE’s 22nd November 2022 message in full:
Over the course of my life I have been in contact with many prisoners who claim they have been unjustly convicted.
I fully appreciate that not all who approach me are truthful, but it is said that between six and seven percent of those convicted are innocent and ought not to be in jail.
I fully understand what a difficult task it is for an innocent prisoner to appeal. It is a long and costly process. It is also difficult for those who have to determine the fate of a man or woman claiming wrongful conviction.
I have known Mark Alexander for almost ten years. I have studied his case and spoken personally with him many times. The evidence against him was circumstantial, as was pointed out by the judge in his case.
I find it difficult to believe that a complete forensic examination was conducted before the jury found him guilty by majority verdict. In recent years, new evidence has emerged which throws even further doubt on the safety of his conviction.
Alas, the wheels of justice grind exceedingly slowly and Mark, still a young man, remains incarcerated – denied access to an open prison because, in the eyes of the authorities, he refuses to accept his guilt.
In the past 12 years, he has achieved academic distinction, but his continued imprisonment in a secure establishment means he may not be able to study for a doctorate.
Mark’s case certainly raises reasonable doubt in my mind and, ought to be reviewed without further delay.
Issues with the 2010 murder conviction and jailing for life with a minimum of 16 years of Mark Alexander:
Not one iota of forensic evidence links the convicted now 35-year-old to the murder and much of the police case against him was based on the word of “suspicious neighbours” with attitudes akin to characters from the TV drama series Midsomer Murders.
On the homepage of the campaign supporting him, it is stated: “Mark has always maintained his innocence… Mark was found guilty on the basis of doubt created about his version of events rather than any evidence of his involvement in a murder. No such evidence exists. There is no known cause, or date, of death – and there were no traces of DNA, blood, or even fingerprints linking Mark to the crime.”
The convicted man’s father, Samuel, had a string of at least eleven aliases and was a known confidence trickster.
The deceased man was cautioned for shoplifting in 1995 and had been involved in mortgage frauds involving a number of properties. He was described by his son tellingly when he remarked: “Dad always seemed to be running or hiding from something.”
Samuel Alexander lied also to his son about what had happened to his mother and cruelly told him she had died of cancer. The pair were only reunited after Mark Alexander’s arrest and it then became known that Samuel Alexander had also cheated her as part of a property scam also.
Mark Alexander has produced evidence showing that there were four potential suspects working at his father’s home around the time of his death. Police never spoke to these suspects and the jury were never made aware of them.
The convicted man has never admitted his guilt of this shocking crime in spite of the fact that in doing so he could have seen his sentence reduced.
Using human rights laws, Mark Alexander was, in March 2020, able to finally obtain files documenting his father’s multiple identities from Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs. He became supposedly the first person in Britain to achieve such access and now also, according to the Daily Mail’s Alice Cachia and Robin Eveleigh: “[The Justice for Mark Alexander’ campaign] are also developing new mobile phone cell site evidence which they hope will provide proof of Alexander’s movements around the time of his father’s death.” They hint that this will show he could not possibly have been present at the time of the murder and burial.
Mark Alexander told The Mirror’s crime editor Tom Pettifor in May 2020: “I’ve always always maintained my innocence, you just assume the system will work, but we didn’t have enough time or evidence to prove it, particularly against the story the prosecution were spinning… Nothing will ever justify what they did to [my father], but I just need some answers.”
Mark Alexander and his late father Samuel Alexander.The scene of the burial (but not necessarily the killing) of Samuel Alexander – 2 Prospect Close, Drayton Parslow, Milton Keynes, Buckinghamshire, MK17 0JB.An aerial shot of the property.Documentary evidence of Samuel Alexander using aliases that show him to have been a man capable of perpetrating fraud and deception.On Friday 28th September 2018, Mark Alexander played at a charity concert for The Howard League of Penal Reform at HM Prison Coldingley in Bisley, Surrey. Terry Waite CBE read from ‘Out of the Silence,’ his book about his 1,763 days in captivity from 1987 to 1991 in Lebanon.
As a 25,000 strong petition is set to be delivered to the Scottish Parliament, we join those asking: “Could convicted killer Luke Mitchell be innocent of the murder of his girlfriend Jodi Jones?”
After hostage-turned-humanitarian Terry Waite CBE highlighted flaws in the September 2010 conviction of Mark Alexander, The Steeple Times examined that case and joined those campaigning for, at the very least, a review of the evidence gathered by a police force who we believe simply wanted a quick and easy conviction.
Often highlighted wrongly as the “Scottish ‘Black Dahlia’ case,” the case of the brutal murder of a 14-year-old schoolgirl named Jodie Jones in Dalkeith, Scotland on 30th June 2003 is another example of a case that continually attracts claims that the convicted perpetrator could actually be innocent.
Whilst Lothian and Borders Police successfully pinned the blame of Miss Jones’s murder on her boyfriend, Luke Mitchell, and secured his conviction in January 2005, tomorrow, Wednesday 16th November, his legal team will deliver a petition signed by 25,000 individuals to the Scottish Parliament demanding “an urgent and fully independent inquiry.” They believe the conviction to be unsafe and cite that “upto 122 items gathered as part of the investigation into the death were never forensically tested.”
Mitchell – who had been dating Jones for four months prior to her murder – was found guilty of killing her by hitting her on the head and body, compressing her neck, restricting her breathing and stabbing her both before and after she died in January 2005. He was sentenced to serve a minimum of twenty years in prison and though several attempts to overturn his conviction have failed, he continues to protest his innocence.
Recently, Scott Mitchell, who has been the lawyer for Mitchell since 2010 but also involved with the case since 2003, remarked:
“Forensic science has improved dramatically. I believe DNA samples that went untested will overhaul the conviction if we can examine them now. Without a doubt, that will prove Luke Mitchell did not kill Jodi.”
A full statement regarding the alleged failings in the case brought by Lothian and Borders Police follows after the videos and photographs beneath this article. It has been compiled by supporters of Luke Mitchell, a dedicated group who have been in touch with The Steeple Times for many months now.
To join the official Facebook group focused on highlighting the supposed flaws in the police investigation that led to the conviction of Luke Mitchell, click here.
To join the 25,400 people who have already signed the Change.org petition requesting a “full, independent review” of the Luke Mitchell case, click here.
Pictured Top – Luke Mitchell with his mother, Corrine.
Editor’s Note – Unlike as is the case in many publications, this article was NOT sponsored or supported by a third-party.
If the wrong man is indeed in jail for the 2003 murder of Jodi Jones, her killer is likely still alive and still at large and still evading justice. If that is the case, Lothian and Borders Police have a lot of questions to answer as to why they didn’t correctly deal with the evidence available to them.
It’s easy for police to pin the blame most especially on young men and in the case of the 2010 conviction of Mark Alexander – pictured here with hostage-turned-humanitarian Terry Waite CBE on the day he graduated in jail – the complete lack of forensic evidence in his conviction for his deviant father is very, very, very troubling. His case deserves to be revisited given all the new evidence that has been found.Two cases involving that of the 1986 conviction of Jeremy Bamber (left) and the 2001 murder of Stuart Lubbock (right) raise questions as to how Essex Police bungled the investigations by mismanaging evidence and making countless errors. We believe both cases should at the very, very least be reinvestigated due to the clear incompetence of this particular police force.In America, the July 1996 jailing of brothers Erik and Lyle Menendez for life without parole rightly continues to be condemned as an outrage given that the evil parents they slayed were clearly both guilty of having abused them consistently until their 20th August 1989 deaths in Beverly Hills, California. These repeatedly sexually abused brothers should have been convicted of manslaughter and they should now be freed.
Text supplied by a member of the Facebook group supporting Luke Mitchell that explains their take on why they believe him to be innocent of the 2003 murder…
The murder of Jodi Jones, a 14-year-old girl, took place in Dalkeith, Scotland on 30th June 2003. Her 14-year-old boyfriend, Luke Mitchell, came under suspicion, but it was several months before he was arrested.
Mitchell was tried for the murder and after Scotland’s longest single-accused trial at that time, Mitchell was convicted by a majority verdict in January 2005 despite there being no direct evidence against him. He was sentenced to a detention without limit of time with a minimum punishment part of 20-years. He has always maintained his innocence.
Jodi Jones left her house after exchanging a series of text messages with her boyfriend Luke Mitchell at around 5pm. She was found horrifically mutilated in a woodland strip behind a six-foot high wall at 11:35pm.
Her boyfriend Luke Mitchell and his dog Mia found her along with Jodi’s sister, Jodi’s sister’s boyfriend and her gran while they searched the path together.
Upon arrival the police separated Luke from the rest of the search party and took him to Dalkeith police station to be forensically examined. The police did not consider the rest of the search party as important witnesses until almost five hours into the investigation. Their clothing would not be taken for examination until around six days after the murder. By the time they were handed in they had either been laundered or different items to the ones said to be worn on that night were handed in to the police.
Forensics arrived at the scene at 8am the following morning, some time prior to this, two identification officers had gathered up all Jodi’s clothing and belongings but they didn’t record how they were collected or packaged.
Jodi was rolled onto a plastic sheet, branches were cut down to make the scene more accessible and the body was not covered leaving any potential evidence exposed to the rain. No attempt was made to estimate the time of death, there are no records of liver temperature, or signs of rigor or livor mortis.
Bin collections still went ahead that day, as did council hedge cutting, and the high school very close by was open as normal with students using the surrounding paths to access the school, while Jodi’s body still lay there uncovered.
Due to the way the crime scene was managed, a lot of potential evidence was destroyed. Despite this there was one full DNA sample recovered from Jodi’s clothing which was a match to another member of the search party, Jodi’s sister’s boyfriend, one semen sample from a condom nearby Jodi’s body and three full samples of DNA which have yet to be matched to anybody. There were many other partial samples found made up of blood, semen and saliva. There was no DNA from Luke Mitchell found.
Despite having other leads to follow and forensic evidence from the scene pointing away from Luke Mitchell, the investigation remained focused on him throughout. The general feeling in the area was that Luke Mitchell would be arrested any day now. In fact, it would take ten months for the police to make an arrest, one which was based on a wholly circumstantial case. During those ten months the media reported almost daily coverage of the case. Luke Mitchell and his mother, Corrine were shot to infamy overnight.
With no direct evidence linking Luke to the crime, the investigation focused in on music and ‘goth culture’ in an attempt to explain why Luke might have murdered Jodi. Both Luke and Jodi were a part of the ‘nu-metal wave’ that was popular during the early 2000s as were many of their friends. The police thought this was important to the investigation and told the media, only five days after the murder;
“We will be looking at what Jodi and her social circle were interested in and an obvious area will be their ties to the Goth movement. We will be examining if the manner in which she was killed has any links to the violent world that many Goths find fascinating and will be speaking to all her friends who had similar interests.”
Fear swept through Dalkeith and the rumour mill went into overdrive. Luke’s school jotters, with quotes from popular video games scrawled across the front were used to imply he had a fascination with the devil.
Police statements reveal that they were asked to search Luke Mitchell’s house for anything related to the singer Marilyn Manson. The police investigation believed that Luke was obsessed with Manson and in particular a series of paintings done by the artist depicting the body of murder victim Elizabeth Short, more commonly known as ‘The Black Dahlia.’
The crown put to the jury that Mitchell was attempting to replicate the killing of Elizabeth Short. In contrast to this, the pathologist who examined Jodi’s body said that there were markedly dissimilarities between the injuries sustained by Elizabeth Short and Jodi Jones and any similarities were superficial.
The only things related to Marilyn Manson that were found during the search of Mitchell’s home was a torn-up calendar and a CD that he had bought two days after the murder. There was no evidence found on Luke’s computer that he had accessed these paintings and the officer who found them online said they were not easy to find.
After ten months of press coverage naming 14-year-old Luke Mitchell as the only suspect and portraying him as a Satanist obsessed with Marilyn Manson, black magic and the occult, was there any need for evidence to convince the judge and jury?
At appeal the crown decided that the Marilyn Manson and Black Dahlia evidence was not to be founded upon. The evidence that had been the backbone of the investigation into Luke Mitchell for ten months, kept the focus on Luke when all other evidence was pointing away from him, and had led to a 14-year-old child being portrayed as already guilty in the press before he was arrested and charged was not to be founded upon.
Discarding the evidence that had been used to portray Luke Mitchell as a killer obsessed with occult rituals and the devil, the crown set out three main pillars of evidence with twenty adminicles of evidence interwoven between these main pillars, that they believe the jury was entitled to base a guilty verdict on. The guilty verdict was based on broad presumptions and inferences in the crown’s case which contradicts exculpatory evidence put forward by the defence.
The circumstantial evidence that was used to convict Luke Mitchell does not hold up to scrutiny.
Pillar one is concerned with guilty knowledge. The crown claimed that Luke Mitchell had knowledge of where Jodi’s body was and that he led the search party straight to it. During the trial the other three members of the search party claimed that on the night of 30th June, Luke had led them to the body and that he was cold and emotionless.
During the first month of the investigation statements taken by these other three members of the search party were consistent with Luke’s version of events – that he had walked past the V-break in the wall, his dog was ‘air sniffing’ and jumping up at the wall so he doubled back and climbed over the V-break. All of the statements began to change after that first month in similar ways to imply that Luke led them right to Jodi’s body.
Pillar two was the evidence of witness ‘AB’ who claimed she had seen a male and a female at the Easthouses end of the path. Despite the descriptions she gave not matching Luke or Jodi and the timing of the sighting contradicting two other witness sightings by people who knew Jodi and the witness herself failing to identify Luke Mitchell in the dock, this sighting was accepted by the jury and is used to infer that Luke Mitchell was at the Easthouses end of the path and in the company of Jodi before her death.
Pillar three, Luke’s alibi. Luke claimed that he was at home cooking dinner at the time of the murder, this is corroborated by two landline telephone calls until 16:25, and his mother and brother [Shane Mitchell, hereby referenced as ‘SM’] from 16:25 to 17:30. He left his house at around 17:30 to wait for Jodi at the end of his street, where he was seen acting normally and wearing the same clothes he had on earlier at school that day, by a couple of boys who knew him. The investigation would not accept Luke’s alibi.
Luke’s mum and brother were charged with perverting the course of justice. These charges would later be dropped without the jury’s knowledge, just before Luke’s mother gave evidence in the trial.
When he was arrested for perverting the course of justice, ‘SM’ was subjected to the same nature of questioning that the police had used on Luke.
At appeal, judges described the nature of this questioning as “abhorrent,” saying “at times the nature of the questioning was such that the questioner did not seem to be interested in a response from the appellant, but rather endeavouring to break him down into giving some hoped for confession by his over bearing and hostile interrogation” (2008 appeal).
‘SM’ was told that if he didn’t tell the police what they wanted to hear he would go to jail for three years. At trial, ‘SM’ told the court, not that his brother was not in that evening but that he couldn’t be sure. The actions of the liaison officer that was assigned to the Mitchell family and who took ‘SM’s’ statement also came under fire at trial. She refused to accept what ‘SM’ was telling her instead using leading phrases like “picture this” and telling ‘SM’: “I can’t accept that.” She eventually conceded on the stand that the investigation was a “shambles.”
This is a case where the police focused in on a suspect based on lifestyle and image, despite having knowledge of exculpatory evidence and ignored or at the very least did not thoroughly investigate incriminating evidence pointing to others.
Should a 14-year old child be imprisoned for life based on a weak circumstantial case when there is DNA evidence found on the victim that doesn’t match him and is yet to be identified?
When you see through the moral panic that swept through the police investigation and the small town of Dalkeith is there really enough evidence to convict Luke Mitchell of murder and can it really be said that justice has been served for Jodi Jones?
