Visitor Comments - Lundy Truth

Go to content

Visitor question (Abridged )

Lundy Truth
Published by Mr G in Question · 22 August 2017
Tags: Visitorcomments
To whosoever this may concern. It has   been interesting to see so many of so called friends of Mark who originally   maintained that there was "absolutely no way that Mark could have   committed these murders", change their testimony to " knowing it   was him all along" or such like as soon as they perceived the tide of   public opinion had turned against Mark. For myself it was quite the opposite.   I can remember first being told about the murders, and having said to those   defending Mark at that time that statistically he would have to be the prime   suspect. But then, having more and more doubts the more I learned, and   changing my mind the more it became apparent the police case against Mark was   at best a very weak and poorly constructed one.

The one thing we do know for sure is   that the murders took place. And if Mark didn't do them then someone else   did, and presumably had a motive to do so.

All the best in your quest for   truth and justice.

1 comment
2017-08-25 11:53:32
Thanks for your interest. Mr G.
The most asked question now is "If not Mark - than who?" Incidentally the most asked question used to be was the drive possible? But we destroyed any argument there and the Crown had to change tactics.

There has always been local names and incidents gossiped about. There is no evidence to support any such thoughts and should be dismissed accordingly. We do not want to fall into the feeble supposition, or mis-information practices employed by the authorities or media.

You are correct in that the murderer is still on the loose. Or possibly, as we suspect doing a short-stint time for other recidivist crimes. There is much that is sinister about events close to, but not involving, the Lundy's that we feel should be investigated. The challenge is we are not investigators. Only the Police have "Power-Of Search" - the ability to get a Search Warrant. Only The Police can choose to retrospectively check previously untested DNA found at the scene against the New DNA Database (not available in 2000) .
It is not in their interests to do so. - They believe they have their man - and are completely closed to any alternative suggestion.
All FACTUAL can do then is to keep beating down their inaccurate theories and once we gain a second acquittal try and get a new and thorough investigation.

The best you can do to help us is to keep believing and keep people talking about it. Eventually others will realise all that the Police & Media say is tainted.


Back to content