IN his mother's eyes, Luke Mitchell could do no wrong.
As he was interviewed on television on the day of Jodi Jones's funeral, Corinne Mitchell rested her hands protectively on his shoulders.
She was there, arms around his neck, as Mitchell laid f lowers at his girlfriend's grave. She stood by his side when the school authorities ordered him to stay away from class in the aftermath of the murder.
Most significantly, she was there in the witness box, refusing to budge from her evidence, which claimed that Mitchell was in their house having dinner around the time he was accused of killing Jodi.
Police officers noticed their particularly close - and tactile - relationship. Both were openly affectionate with each other.
A formidable character not averse to confrontation, Mrs Mitchell's fierce protection of her boys was well known throughout the neighbourhood. Few parental limits were placed on Mitchell's freedom.
Discipline did not seem to feature in the relationship.
"Corinne was very defensive of her sons, as you might expect of a strong-willed single mother, " said her neighbour, Keith Halley.
Her ex-husband, Phil, a joiner, had moved out of the family home when Luke was aged 10.
By her own admission Mrs Mitchell, 45, had a quick temper, also inherited by Luke, and a laugh that could be heard bellowing down the street.
Neighbours said she had had more than one dispute with those living close by in the quiet residential area.
One said: "(She was) a little anti-authority. She had no high respect for the police. Whenever there was a brush with police, the police were always in the wrong."
According to a family friend, she doted on her sons.
"She would do anything for them, " he said.
It was Luke Mitchell, the confident, opinionated one, who seemed to be favourite.
Mrs Mitchell came into conflict with the teachers both from Luke Mitchell's primary and secondary school. His rule-breaking and disregard continued with little parental intervention.
Meanwhile, the teenager revelled in the attention he received from his nonconformist attitude and dramatic dress sense.
Mrs Mitchell also appeared to tolerate her son's smoking cannabis, and overnight visits from his girlfriends. But she denied knowledge of his excessive cannabis consumption, despite the presence of the drug and scales to weigh it in his bedroom.
The mother also insisted she had no idea he was using the money she gave him, both from his allowance and wages for casual work, to buy drugs.
Mrs Mitchell ran Scott's Caravans, the family caravan sale and repair dealership which she took over from her elderly mother, Ruby.
As speculation mounted over her son's implication in Jodi's death, a couple of the caravans were vandalised and set alight.
She stopped frequenting the monthly music sessions at her local pub, the Sun Inn, and was shunned by many in the community.
In the run-up to the trial, Luke Mitchell's brother, Shane, 23, moved out of the family home.
The court case culminated with evidence from the woman who had protested her son's innocence to the last.
Again and again she was reminded of the seriousness of committing perjury. Again and again, she insisted she was telling the truth.
She told the court she had forgotten to tell detectives about a missing knife she bought Mitchell six months after Jodi's death, and which she mysteriously managed to recover from her house - despite a police search earlier that day.
Mrs Mitchell also bought a new parka, days afterwitnesses reported smoke from a log burner in her back garden the night Jodi died. It may not have been a coincidence.
Before he was arrested, Mrs Mitchell took her then 15-yearold son into Edinburgh to continue a family tradition - to get a tattoo.
To make sure her son got what he wanted, she went with him to Whiplash Trash, and corroborated his claim to be legally over-age, backed by false documentation.
The design they chose to adorn Luke's upper arm was a skull surrounded by flames. "It was very him, " she remembered affectionately.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article