Luke Mitchell Official Campaign

Luke Mitchell is effectively being treated as a political prisoner. The current Lord Advocate, Dorothy Bain, is married to Alan Turnbull, the prosecutor who led the case that secured Luke Mitchell’s conviction. Although Alan Turnbull may have stepped away from active involvement to allow her appointment, she now holds ultimate authority over decisions connected to cases prosecuted during his tenure. Even if no formal rule has been breached, the appearance of a conflict of interest is unavoidable. Public confidence in the justice system depends not only on fairness, but on the clear and visible absence of bias. When the chief legal officer of the country is responsible for decisions relating to cases in which her spouse played a central role, that confidence is inevitably damaged. This is why the structure itself must be questioned. The dual role of the Lord Advocate — as both head of prosecutions and a member of government — raises serious constitutional concerns. Many legal commentators have argued that the position should be separated from government to safeguard prosecutorial independence. Beyond legality, there is also the issue of principle. Public office carries a moral responsibility as well as a legal one. Where a situation gives rise to a clear and ongoing perception of conflict, the ethical course of action is to remove oneself from decision-making or to reform the structure that allows such conflicts to arise. If the justice system is to command trust, those at its highest levels must be seen to act not only within the rules, but in a way that upholds the highest moral standards. This is not about personal animosity. It is about integrity, transparency, and the public’s right to have absolute confidence in Scotland’s justice system. As long as the Lord Advocate has a duel role there is no confidence. Donate on the link below and let’s see how they decide to approach this ongoing political case. The public are watching 👀 (We have no affiliation with any political party) crowdjustice.com/case/help-brin…

@lizyeld I agree they are there to prevent a miscarriage of Justice and only approve one of they cannot find a way to uphold it.

CCRC in England no different. Even cases supported by the best of lawyers are turned down, with the usual, "Computer says no" reasoning as to why. These organisations may exist to imply to the public that any wrongful allegation will be recognised, but they present a total illusion. Their prime purpose is in ensuring that the "reputation of the justice system is never impugned" and we see so many innocents sacrificed on this altar that it is utterly devastating to those who see, know and care.

The Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission (SCCRC) was established in 1999 to serve as an independent body that reviews convictions and sentences where it is alleged a miscarriage of justice has occurred. In the most recent 2024–25 Annual Report, the SCCRC recorded its busiest year yet: • 213 new applications received, • 226 cases concluded, • 40 cases reached full review, • but only 3 cases were referred to the High Court, with 11 convictions quashed under specific legislation related to Post Office convictions. These numbers are important - but also starkly limited. Of the hundreds of applications, only a tiny handful lead to a formal review and even fewer result in any corrective action. This is the system’s central problem: it relies entirely on individual applicants to initiate the process. If a person believes they are innocent, they must apply themselves - often without any guaranteed support or representation. There is strong evidence that legal representation matters. The SCCRC has produced research examining the impact of legal representation on applications, categorising cases by the level of solicitor input. Where legal professionals were substantially involved - e.g., securing expert reports or witness precognitions - applications were significantly more effective than those submitted with little or no legal input. Yet, legal aid and access to representation are not guaranteed. Many people who have been convicted - particularly those with limited income, poor literacy, disability, or educational disadvantage - face enormous barriers in securing meaningful legal input. The system assumes applicants can compile legal arguments, gather documents, and understand complicated procedural requirements on their own - even from within prison. This is not just unfair - it creates systemic inequality in access to justice. If legal representation improves the chances of review, then by definition those without representation are effectively excluded from meaningful consideration. The SCCRC is fundamentally reactive. It does not trigger reviews automatically, even when credible new evidence appears or when serious public concern arises. An individual must lodge an application before the Commission can act. That creates a situation where those most likely to have been wrongfully convicted - often the vulnerable, disadvantaged, or least informed - are least able to access the system designed to protect them. Consider this: a person with a compelling claim - such as evidence of another suspect, serious non‑disclosure by the prosecution, or material that undermines the original conviction - may never see it reviewed simply because they don’t know how to navigate the process, can’t write effective submissions, or lack legal help. Applications that do succeed often hinge on deep legal analysis, expert opinions, and meticulous presentation - tools that are typically beyond the reach of an unrepresented applicant. The SCCRC’s statutory non‑disclosure rules mean that, even in cases it rejects, there is limited public information about why the decision was made. This lack of transparency compounds the sense of inequality and makes it harder to identify systemic shortcomings. If the SCCRC is truly meant to correct miscarriages of justice, the current design needs to be rethought: • Automatic triggers for review should exist when significant new evidence emerges or when cases draw substantial public concern. • Legal support should be genuinely accessible - not dependent on personal wealth, literacy, or access to pro bono counsel. • The system should be proactive, transparent, and accountable, rather than waiting for applicants to fight their way through procedural hurdles. Justice cannot depend on your ability to hire a lawyer, fill out forms, or write legal submissions from a prison cell. Until this changes, the SCCRC will remain a safeguard in theory, but an unequal and incomplete one in practice.

⏳ Campaign update We know it’s been quiet. Believe us, we wish we could give more updates - the legal team is still working through important matters behind the scenes. It’s slow. It’s frustrating. And we feel it too. But this isn’t a pause - it’s careful preparation to make sure every step counts. We’re incredibly grateful for everyone sticking with us during this waiting period. Your continued support, shares, and messages of encouragement are what keep this moving forward. Thank you for your patience — we’ll share more as soon as we can. ❤️ ❤️ Where Luke’s Support Is Coming From Thanks to all of you, we’ve now raised £32,100 Here’s how people are helping spread the word and contribute: •Facebook (combined): ~£14,410 •Direct visits: ~£4,280 •Google search: ~£3,560 •Twitter / X: ~£2,510 •Campaign website: ~£870 •Backer shares: ~£1,000 combined •Case page shares: ~£710 •TikTok: ~£400 •Email campaigns: ~£320 •YouTube: ~£310 Other sources - £3,730 Family - £25,000 Total - £57,100 (before fees) Thank you all so much for your support 🙏

@DGBandz817 @mymixtapez Might be a bit hard my friend.

@mymixtapez She rather move Tupac back in honestly

Will Smith is seen living his best life in Africa as his wife Jada debates if she should let him move back in.👀

@Scybluscy We have every confidence that it will be soon. Thank you 🙏

@LMC89543 This is certainly encouraging but discouraging at the same time. Hopefully Luke will be freed sooner rather than 38yrs later!

Today we recognise a mother whose strength most people could never imagine. Happy Mother’s Day to Corinne Mitchell❤️ For more than two decades, Corinne has stood beside her son with unwavering love, courage and determination. While others may have walked away, she never did. Through every setback, every challenge, and every year that has passed, she has continued to fight because a mother never stops believing in her child. Her resilience, loyalty and fierce love are a reminder that a mother’s voice does not fade with time — it grows stronger. Today we honour Corinne, and every mother who refuses to give up when it matters most ❤️

Luke They took him young, just fifteen years, And left him trapped in walls of fears. A boy whose laughter should have soared, Confined in shadows, all ignored. The system spoke with papered lies, While truth was hidden from our eyes. Deception whispered through the halls, As innocence was made to crawl. His mother watched through endless nights, Enduring cruelty, wrongful fights. Each day a struggle, harsh and long, A boy undone by all that’s wrong. Locked in darkness, a cell so tight, A small world drowned in pain and spite, Whispers of torment, lies, disdain, And yet his spirit stayed the same. Her love stood firm, her courage bright, A guiding hand through darkest night. She bore the weight, she braved the pain, Her heart will never be the same. But truth survives where lies have tread, And justice waits to lift the dead. Moments of childhood stolen fast, The boy endures, his soul will last. Fifteen years, a life misread,
But hope survives where light has led. No rumor, headline, or false scene
Can dim the heart of fifteen. So hear our vow, so strong, so clear, The truth will rise, the end is near. No chain, no lie, no twisted plan Can break the boy, the innocent man.

@DomLovesNovels Sandra lean is no longer affiliated with the campaign.

@LMC89543 I'm reading the book Innocents Betrayed by Sandra Lean. Botched police investigation to put it mildly. #LukeMitchell #SandraLean #InnocentsBetrayed #MiscarriageofJustice

Transparent Legal funds update: • £29,659.84 cleared (net) • £29,627.54 already transferred • £152.09 pending transfer • 881 cleared pledges • £25,000 family donation transferred Nearly £30,000 has now been raised via CrowdJustice and processed for Luke’s legal fight. In total, we have raised £54,659.84, which is incredible. Every contribution — large or small — is helping fund the Legal work needed. The support continues to be overwhelming. Thank you for standing with Luke, Corinne and us and keeping this campaign moving.

@ScottishSun @drbirtchnell LOL

John Swinney secretly briefed on Nicola Sturgeon ‘SNP fraud’ let-off BEFORE her #Echobox=1772318889" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">thescottishsun.co.uk/news/15981069/…

What if one of the most famous murder cases in British criminal history was not exactly as the public has always been told? Not fiction. Not theory. But a question arising from documents, records and inconsistencies which deserve lawful scrutiny. History is not only written by victors. Sometimes it is recorded by those who are wronged. The public record should never fear examination.

@lapogus1 @1classico That’s right

@1classico @LMC89543 I am not familar with all the details but iirc there were DNA samples on Jody's body/clothes which did not match Luke Mitchell.

Case fact Did you know? - The Lord Advocate Dorothy Bain and Police Scotland started the process of destroying the evidence in the Luke Mitchell case within 1 month of that new role? thescottishsun.co.uk/news/9853524/l…

@phase_3_dream @an77684124 @ScottishSuffra1 Ah thank you for the kind words sir

@LMC89543 @an77684124 @ScottishSuffra1 That’s a great post. I’m sure your output will have an eventual and good effect, an effect that’ll see the the overturn of a clearly wrongful conviction of an innocent young man.

If she is as straight as a die like they say she is, then the DNA samples in the Luke Mitchell case would have been handed over to the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission in 2013 when they requested them. No hesitation. No obstruction. Just full cooperation. Instead they stonewalled. And after being presented with 25,000 public signatures calling for an independent review of Luke’s case, that review could have been approved. Because if there’s nothing to hide, independent scrutiny shouldn’t be a threat. It was not even read. If she wants the Scottish Public to believe she’s not corrupt and is as straight as a die she can put an end to this case, and the misery and, hand over the samples for up to date testing - as a minimum. @COPFS @ScotGovFM @scotgov #JusticeforJodiJones

@AndyGraysdouble @JohnSmytheInves Read them and maybe you’ll find out.

@JohnSmytheInves Why?

I would recommend everyone to download all 18 batch documents relating to the James Hamilton correspondence now if they have not already done so. gov.scot/publications/f…

@wee_val Absolutely Val. We still have someway to go to get the Legal funds we need but we will do that in stages. We have enough for the time being and will go again when we need to.

@LMC89543 Let's do it again for him when he's released.

@Douglas4Moray Agreed. Why are they hell bent on keeping it in tact? 🤔 transparent LOL

📖 It was in the SNP manifesto to look at splitting the Lord Advocate’s dual role. 📋 They ran a consultation on it. 🤔I wonder what has happened recently to make the SNP Leader think the status quo is ok?

@heraldscotland This has to dissolve completely. Why are they so determined to keep this as is? That’s shady in itself.

'As a member of the First Minister's cabinet, it is imperative that government officials provide clarity on sensitive and complex legal matters. That has not happened," writes Rebecca McCurdy' 👇

@LMC89543 @Joeninho1962 Because of the massive issues with corruption This case does not receive the anxious attention it deserves From all perspectives And Dotty Bain is completely conflicted in it As a result, so is @COPFS There is no “independent” counsel under her, it’s a myth Review now

@massiveFanilow They need to be seen to be doing what’s right. Approve the up to date testing and end this nightmare for all involved.

@LMC89543 Referring to the PRN that apparently never existed…🤦‍♀️ if it wasn’t for Luke’s liberty being at stake it would be utterly laughable.

COPFS and Police Scotland destroyed the evidence in the Luke Mitchell case—and they got caught red-handed below. Hundreds of productions - potential exculpatory items - secretly binned starting 2021, right after the Channel 5 doc blew the lid off doubts. Against rules (should've kept till at least 2026). Only paused Nov 14-15 2022 via COPFS instruction when scrutiny hit, but most was already gone. And the Chief of a police Ian Livingston was let out the back door 2 years earlier than announced. He handed over mid-panic, seen in those leaked emails below, just as the disposal freeze kicked in. Coincidence? Or cover-up in a life-sentence stitch-up? Time for full independent inquiry. Evidence gone, samples and questions remain. #LordAdvocatesHusband #LukeMitchell #JodiJones #MiscarriageOfJustice #EvidenceDestroyed

We were told there was no PRN. In other words they won’t disclose who ordered it.