Monday, April 1, 2013

Luke Mitchell: Poem To Jodie

What do we look for here?

We follow pronouns;
we note any inclusion of being sorry, or regretful,
we follow principle:

Luke's Poem to Jodi


"Goodbye Jodi.  Please can you say what happened,


Please tell us who it was, who took your life so cruelly

For no apparent cause.


Note that he says goodbye to her, but asks her to "please" tell what happened
and "who" took her life.  Where someone begins is always important and it appears important
to the author here that he wants the public to think that he wants to know 
"who" did this.
Note also that someone took her life, but not for no cause, but no 
"apparent" cause; indicating belief that there was a cause
but that it is not known to others. 
You had so much to give us, you lived life your own way,


Note the plural, "us" and to singular, "me"

Whoever did this to you, should just be put away.


note "whoever" and not "just" put away.  No other punishment?

You didn’t see bad in others, you didn’t like to judge,

who is the other that she did not see the bad in?

We’re sorry Jodi, truly, but we’ll always hold a grudge.


Note the expression of being "sorry", yet it is plural, "we".  The use of being
"sorry" is vital. 
You were taken from us so cruelly,

Please don’t ask us to forgive,

We cannot get this from our hearts however long we live.

Note the avoidance of the personal singular pronouns. 


You’ve been laid to rest, but not in peace,

We know that just can’t be,

But we’ll say goodbye and forever hope

That justice we will see."


Justice was seen.  

35 comments:

Anonymous said...

Why don't you analyze this short statement from the so-called girlfriend of Trayvon Martin:

http://media.trb.com/media/acrobat/2013-03/174905720-29122808.pdf

Lis said...

Interesting. In the case of poetry, are there qualifiers for statement analysis? A person may choose a word based upon rhyme or meter rather than the first word they would ordinarily have chosen?

S + K Mum said...

Thanks Peter (and John for bringing this case up).

There is a lot of doubt about his conviction which is why I am pleased to see his statements analysed.

He wrote a letter to a Sandra Lean who I think is fighting against his conviction, which was published in the newspapers but I can't find the exact transcript of the letter, just snippets.

john said...

OT..

Dr Drew.

The Jodi Arias story is being turned into a TV movie (shocker!). Who should play Jodi?

https://www.facebook.com/DrDrewHLN

ME said...

Whoever has her arms around him(in picture"seems to be holding him back,and he looks about to attack!

Anonymous said...

That was some bad poetry. Did he have to injure the rest of us?

Layla said...

This person should not be writing poetry. Awful!

Layla said...

I don't understand this poem.
I haven't been following this case much, and I don't know who Luke Mitchell is.
But, the 1st problem is this poem is that the entire poem is addressed to Jodie. I am assuming that he is not talking about her though when he says "you were taken from us too soon". Is he addressing 2 different people in the poem, Jodie and someone else?
It is outstandingly terrible poem.

Layla said...

Sorry! I thought this was the Jodi Arias case. My bad!

Layla said...

Oh OK--I looked down in the blog and see the case that it is about. I would say by the poem he does seem guilty. They should tack on a few more months to his sentence for his horrible poetry also.

Lemon said...

"We’re sorry Jodi, truly, but we’ll always hold a grudge."
__________

"truly" seems like extra information, to persuade?
"grudge" seems an unexpected word choice, no matter who it is 'intended' to portray as holding it

Layla said...

It is interesting how he praises Jodi, because she did not like to judge people. It sounds like someone's got a guilty conscience.

Anonymous said...

Why don't you analyze this short statement from the so-called girlfriend of Trayvon Martin:

According to her own twitter she was not his girlfriend and had a boyfriend........

john said...

ME said...
Whoever has her arms around him(in picture"seems to be holding him back,and he looks about to attack!

Its his Mum.Some people were saying that when they were in their company they felt uncomfortable,meaning they seemed to close?..

I will see if i can find the link..

john said...

Snipped.

She bought him knives. She lied for him. At home, he was allowed to sleep with underage girls; he smoked cannabis; he kept bottles of urine in his bedroom, which was described as a hovel. He stored computers on his bed and appeared to doss on a mattress on the f loor.

When the police came to arrest Luke, he was in his mother's bedroom with her. She claimed he was upset and she was comforting him. She betrayed her intense physical closeness to her son whenever they appeared in public: during the interview he gave to Sky News, she constantly stroked his neck and clung to him.

What motherwould publicly allow herself to caress her son's neck and face like that? And what 14-year-old son would, just as publicly, allow it to happen? During their controversial visit to Jodi's grave, the pair stood face to face in intimate embrace. Had you not known they were mother and son, you could almost have confused them for girlfriend and boyfriend.

Ian Stephen, a lecturer in forensic psychology at Glasgow Caledonian University and a criminal psychologist, is quoted as saying: "The whole relationship comes across as something quite different from normal. It is almost over-close. You are left with the impression that the son has almost taken on a partner's role. She is almost more like a girlfriend than a mother."

john said...

Cont..

To witness Mrs Mitchell visiting her son in Polmont, the day after he was found guilty, was to be struck by how inappropriately she was dressed: in tight jeans, thigh-high boots, bare midriff. Again, this seemed a strange choice, given her very public role at the trial. It was hardly maternal.

Her conduct from the time of the murder to the conviction appears to suggest that her son, a mere child, had been handed inappropriate control in their relationship. At a time when a 14-year-old boy needs discipline, standards and a strong moral lead, it would appear Corinne Mitchell offered none of these things. Did her relationship with him tip over into a form of abuse.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/sport/spl/aberdeen/why-did-luke-mitchell-kill-his-mother-holds-a-clue-1.64902

S + K Mum said...

His relationship with Jodi was sexual and he was also having a relationship with another girl, Jodi didn't know and I don't think he was forthcoming about it to the police.

I have snipped some of the things he wrote in a letter that was released in 2012 (frustrated that I can't find the letter in it's entirety):

"I miss her all the time. Jodi was amazing. I didn’t realise how much I loved Jodi until she was taken from me.”

(when asked to take police to the murder scene after his dog and him found her body he wrote) “I couldn’t. I couldn’t bring myself to go back over the wall,” said Mitchell. “Then an officer put me in the back of a police Land Rover and took my phone off me.”

(Speaking of the trial, which he described as a “farce”, Mitchell wrote) “Lies were told. If I could give one message to those who doubted my innocence, it would be this – take a look at the real evidence in the case.

“The truth is, Jodi’s killer is still out there, free, and an innocent 15-year-old was put in their place.”

S + K Mum said...

More snippets from his letter to Sandra Lean:

"When I found her, in my head I knew it was Jodi and that she was dead, but I couldn't bring myself to say it out loud.

"I was completely in shock. I didn't know what to do. It was as if I had gone numb. I couldn't get my head around what had happened, what I had seen. I still get flashbacks of that sight."

"I've never met anyone who I've had the same feelings for, or connection with, as with Jodi. When I was with her, nothing else mattered."

"For nearly nine years now, people have been calling me a liar. The lie-detector test proves all of them wrong.

"The truth is Jodi's killer is still out there, free. That is what people should be angry about, that is what people should fear."


And this is what Sandra Lean was quoted as saying:

"As Luke himself says in the letter, IF the conviction is not safe, then the person who did that is still running about.
(Does she really believe he is innocent?)

Anonymous said...

While I think this kid is probably guilty, I don't think it's possible to analyze a poem using SA. It's poetry, word choices are made to have an effect or to rhyme or to fit in the right number of syllables. The use of "grudge" for instance, would be odd if not for trying to obviously force a rhyme. What do you expect, he's a teenager, they aren't known for writing subtle poetry. His statements to reporters and the police, fine; but a poem, I don't think so.

Apple said...

Anon 7:27,
"What do we look for here?

We follow pronouns;
we note any inclusion of being sorry, or regretful, we follow principle:" - PH

----------
I disagree. He chose "we", not "I". He apologized. His pronouns weren't chosen because they rhyme. It is the same with text messages, etc.

ME said...

Thanks John I'm quite clear now about what I interpreted by the picture ;0( ps man united lost today lol ;0)

ME said...

Ps its "poem"is all "we"And"us"???? Him and his mum??? I'm not trained or educated in this but I'm interested by the views of you lot it's my Internet addiction arghhh ;0)

~mj said...

I've spent a lot of time looking this case over. I started with Luke's b/c everybody is so certain he's guilty. I found this:

http://caseblog.wronglyaccusedperson.org.uk/luke-mitchell-is-innocent/no-smoke/

The link to chapter 6 is found on that page. They make a compelling argument, even including the sources, and in cases they cannot, they offer a way to contact someone.

Now, I'm off to read the prosecutions case.

My best try said...

"I was on the phone when Trevon decided to go to the corner store. It started to rain so he decided to walk through another complex because it was raining to hard."

She was on the phone with Trevon, but the way she states "he decided" this and that, how would she know that? Because he told her? If he told her then why wouldn't she be saying, "he said he'd talk to me on the way to the store...and/or he told me it started raining". From deciding to go to the store it suddenly is raining as he's on his way home (MISSING INFORMATION) and "he decided to walk through another complex" ANOTHER? complex? So he had already walked through a complex? Rain is mentioned twice, it is important, was he walking thru complexes because it was raining and not many people would be out?

"He started walking then noticed someone was following him. then he decided to find a shortcut cause the man wouldn't follow him. then he said the man didn't follow him again."

He started walking, started but didn't finish, he noticed he was being followed and mentioned it to her, but then there is a contradiction as to whether the man didn't or did follow him! CONFUSING!

"Then he looked back and saw the man again." Did Trevon say to her, 'i'm lookin' back and i see him again?" doubtful, this sounds like she is embellishing the story.

"then he looked back and saw the man again. the man started getting closer. then trevon turned around and said Why are you following me!! Then I heard him fall, then th ephone hung up. I called back and text. No response. In my mind I thought it was just a fight. then I found out this tragic story. thank you."

There is no way that Trevon gave her a blow by blow description of him looking back, the man is getting closer, i'm turning around now.....definitely story telling at this point. then she says that Trevon SAID "why are you following me" but then puts TWO exclaimation points after it.
One has to wonder if SHE HEARD HIM FALL, AND THE PHONE HUNG UP, AND SHE GOT NO RESPONSE FROM CALLING HIM, AND IN HER MIND SHE THOUGHT TREVON WAS IN A FIGHT...then why didn't she call 911 right then?

I'm curious as to what a handwriting expert would say over the LARGELY WRITTEN "THANK YOU" at the bottom.

I'm sure she was on the phone with him, and she may have heard Trevon ask why are you following me, but she has left out a HUGE portion of time during the call (the walk to the store, being at the store, the walk thru the "other" complex etc.) and she wasn't upset enough by what she heard or the lack of a response to alert anyone.

Anonymous said...

MyBestTry @ 1:17 a.m., I think you're giving too much credence and critique to a phone conversation between two teenagers during which quite a bit of silent time elapsed as they made simple meaningless comments back and forth. Teenagers can (and do) stay on the phone together for an hour and have long silent lapses between them where nothing or next to nothing is said, just some mumbled meaningless remarks.

There is no way this girl could have known that she was having the last conversation on this side of eternity with Trayvon while he was being hunted down like a mad dog and shot dead, not realizing the ultimate importance of Trayvon's fears that he was being followed and was scared. Had she realized what was happening to Trayvon at the time, which she didn't, she wouldn't have known exactly where he was anyway.

Why didn't she call 911? Why would she? She didn't sense the true emergency and may not even remember each and every little comment that was made between her and Trayvon or exactly what was said in what order . I think the questions and her answers speak for themselves.

She didn't hear most of the short rapid conversation between Zimmerman and Trayvon as he was being attacked, nor did she hear Zimmerman shoot Trayvon dead. She would have had no way of knowing or even suspecting that Trayvon had just been attacked or had met his maker shortly after the phone was knocked out of his hand and went dead. How could she know? She doesn't (nor do you) have mental telepathy or x-ray eyes.

Anonymous said...

Peter, your last comment in your article "Luke Mitchell: Poem to Jodi" your final statement is: "Justice was seen". Really? You know that to be a fact?

I don't think you do. Are you just seeing what you want to see based on words that could be misinterpreted to mean something else? I would say that IS a possibility, simply based on DNA evidence that was found at the scene that does NOT belong to Luke yet is being used against him?> Do we believe in the accuracy of DNA or don't we?

Also, there's the matter of Luke's passed polygraph examination. Based on Luke's (and his mothers') clean polygraph tests that showed no deception, theirs doesn't count, yet we are high on failed polygraphs and give them much credibility as being accurate.

We can quickly conclude that Shawn & Billie, (the Ramseys and others) lied when they failed THEIR polygraph tests, but not when Luke Mitchell PASSED his polygraph test can we consider the possibility of his innocence? In Luke's particular case we don't believe HIS polygraph is accurate yet we use the failed ones against the suspected parties?

john said...

Ive searched for the interview of luke Mitchell on sky news and can't find it,can anyone help/If you locate it could you post it please.

Thanks..

S + K Mum said...

Is this the one John?

Transcript of Interview with James Matthews - SKY News on 3rd September 2003

JAMES MATTHEWS: It’s 65 days since Jodi was killed, Luke, clearly it’s a tragedy for her family, do you see it as a tragedy for your family as well?
LUKE: Yes.


JAMES MATTHEWS: Tell me about your experience over the last two months.
LUKE: It’s just been worse than a nightmare. At least a nightmare you wake up from eventually but this, you can’t wake up from it.


JAMES MATTHEWS: What’s been the worst part of the last two months?
LUKE: The worst part would be still finding Jodi. That was still the worst part. All the rest of it, the police and accusations and everything I couldn’t care about, it’s just … I just want to find out what happened and who did it.


JAMES MATTHEWS: Do you feel that the finger has been pointed at you as the person responsible?
LUKE: I feel it has been left to the media and public to decide. It is trial by media. They haven’t actually come out and totally accused me, apart from in interviews, the police have accused me but I feel it has been left to trial by media to see what the public decide, who’s guilty and who’s not. The way the police are handling it, they have searched other houses and they have other suspects but I seem to be really the only person they are mentioning by name in specific detail.


JAMES MATTHEWS: But you have an alibi for that night because you were with friends?
LUKE: Yes. I was, first I was waiting just at the end of the estate where I was in full view, cars were passing, people were just getting home from work on buses, then I met up with my friends.


JAMES MATTHEWS: Who vouch for you?
LUKE: Yes, they gave statements the same as mine.


JAMES MATTHEWS: It is a question on everybody’s lips in this community, it is a question you clearly have an answer for. Did you kill Jodi Jones?
LUKE: No, I never, I wouldn’t think of it. All the time we were going out we never had one argument at all, never. We never fell out or anything.


JAMES MATTHEWS: How do you feel at being told to stay away from the funeral?
LUKE: That was a hard blow. I was dreading going to the funeral but I did want to go and being told not to go due to the fact that it would turn the funeral into a circus, a media circus, was bad. It would have been a media circus without me but that was, if it was the family’s wishes, that’s what I was going to do?


JAMES MATTHEWS: You have paid your own tribute, you have written a poem. Tell me why you felt you needed to do that?
LUKE: I just felt I had to say goodbye in my own way.


JAMES MATTHEWS: So what would you say to those who would look at you and think he killed his girlfriend?
LUKE: I just say they are being na├»ve and not to believe everything you read in the papers. As a lot of folk know from what they’ve said and what’s turned out in the papers, they do change what people have said, not the whole truth is published in papers. It is basically what the people want to hear is what printed.
.....cont..

S + K Mum said...

cont.....

JAMES MATTHEWS: I suppose the difficulty is from 5 p.m. to whenever Jodie was found, that's a long time to fill and to account for, especially if you lose track of time. The question I suppose for detectives, for people who look at that is could anybody account for every minute in that sort of period? Can you, can you account for every minute?
LUKE: No. Well the police seem to expect people to, as you say, pin down every minute of their life, to expect us to know when we do small insignificant things like doing the dishes, expect us to have a time for that, it isn’t possible to keep a pin of every minute that you do something.


JAMES MATTHEWS: This burning of clothes keeps getting mentioned and there is also the subject of a missing knife, is that your missing knife?
LUKE: No. The burning clothes that wasn’t us. They just stated that a female relative of the suspect admitted to burning clothes.


JAMES MATTHEWS: Was that you or anyone connected to you?
LUKE: No, not that we know of.


JAMES MATTHEWS: Finally, do you miss Jodi?
LUKE: A lot. It’s just, everything I do seems to remind me, her views and everything come up everywhere. Everywhere you look, going about the streets, there are posters. It’s just, I can’t believe … it still feels like a nightmare.

S + K Mum said...

This is the link to the above:

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=67.0

john said...

S + K Mum

Thanks,its the video that accompanies that interview is what i'm after.

Thanks For looking though.

S + K Mum said...

Ah sorry.

Can't find the video footage either.

~mj said...

I am having serious trouble finding credible sources, like transcripts, to back up the prosecutions case. All I've found are the accusations of him being seen by a gal, which she didn't identify in photos, but rather recognized him from the papers. Then him finding the body, this seems to be their main argument, which honestly if you read court transcripts has major holes, of course he'd find the body....he had a German Shepard that was in tracking school with him. I'm concerned about this one. Does anybody know of sources, other than media, that I can read something solid from the prosecution?

With no DNA of lukes,but that of sisters fiance (on her bra no less) and someone eles's on her "tracker" (I don't know what that means).This is looking bad for the courts, could this be another case that has been tried in court of public opinion???

S + K Mum said...

mj,

Tracker - this may be tracksuit top or trousers? I haven't read that anywhere so it's just a guess based upon people calling tracksuit trousers 'trackies' (jogging trousers).


Anonymous said...

I have been reading up on this case, and I can not believe this kid was convicted. I am not saying he is innocent, but there was no evidence against him, yet a lot of DNA from others. Others who also had no alibi. And we're placed at the scene and admitted to being around the area. One of whom changed his appearance!