GUILTY UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, found deceased, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #25

[mrjitty]

I realise I am being a bit pedantic, but I find it really difficult to accept ‘as fact’ that which we don’t have any evidence for, and that which can have more than one possible inference. Surely reaching a conclusion from an event that has two more more possible inferences is still speculation?


Edited for clarification.

The jury must consider what logical and obvious inferences can be drawn from the evidence.

If more than one inference can be drawn, and one doesn't support guilt - then a not guilty verdict has to follow.

For example, I find suicide to be speculative. There is no real evidential foundation to infer she committed suicide IMO

Libby blundering into the river by accident, i would normally find to be a bit too coincidental and convenient, unless the evidence is showing it more or reasonably likely it happened that way (@Tortoise 'analaysis)

When the evidence leads in one direction, then events that are normally rare, become more probable

 

[Mommysleuth11]

No case will ever yield total proof and 100% certainty tho. Or very few.

Earlier on @bos posted a really good post about determining beyond all reasonable doubt.

Realistically there are limited versions of what happened between PR arriving at Oak Road and Libby ending up in the river. The job is to decide what is plausible using everything you know. Prior offending, later behaviour, lies, subtle hints.


They did indeed - the tortured soul stuff wandering off stuff.

That's why I said I 'suspect' even they don't 'believe' misadventure is possible from there. I was offering my opinions. IMO misadventure from outside the park is unlikely.

That's their best, and probably only realistic defence I would expect a lot more about Libby's ability to walk that night. Lots more about parts of the river with steeper sides. Lots more about clearer pathways to it.

More about her youth and resilience rather than her mental health. More about screams in Oak Road before she sets off rather than in the park. Things that would make it more likely than just wandering off and finding the river.

IMO I'd expect a good defence to put PR at least some way into the park with Libby to help misadventure as explicit testimony rather than hints about accepting some lies. But that's my opinion only and I wouldn't feel I had to accept that lie

If I can offer another opinion - I suspect the defence don't believe much of the rest of PRs story either. But quite rightly - everyone deserves a fair trial.

Based on other evidence I think guilty. But I haven't heard it all

You think him not guilty.

I think the jury will find him not guilty as well.

Bbm

I find this last statement incredibly interesting. In that, our views and opinions obviously differ and are opposing, but as much as I feel its not proven/not guilty, I believe the jury will find him guilty.
I suppose time will tell for all of us.

 

[Sooty]

Can I ask why you think he would not think any of this is wrong? I understand he said his previous crimes were silly but I think he was trying to make light of them not because they were not wrong but to make LE think it was no big deal to him. I feel like If he did not think they were wrong he would have confessed right away when LE asked him about what they found in his car. But he first lied and denied they were his.

I think he is very dismissive of the seriousness of the impact of his public masturbation - calling it silly , referring to it as his ‘problem’. Etc. You may be right that he is just trying to play it down, but it is my opinion that it really does come across that he doesn’t actually think of it as a big deal. The jury will have a far better view of him after seeing him in the witness stand, I can only form my opinion from what I read.

 

[Lyall0814]

I don't think they will be necessarily having furious rows. They could have just reached a complete impasse and gone ok let's go through absolutely everything again from the beginning and see if we can get any closer to a conclusion. Whatever decision they make will have been made in total good faith and after days of debate. It's possible they might regretfully have to say not guilty because they don't find that they know BARD what happened. They might find him guilty. Either way they will have followed the process of law to do what is right and there is no shame in that.

I suppose so, and normally when I follow a trial I'd agree with you completely. This one's got me though - I'm going to sit in a dark room and calm down.

 

[Winterbells]

I'm not offended, and I think there's probably some truth in what you say. It ties in with his ideas of what qualifies as "cheating on his wife" and what doesn't.

There are unpalatable truths, and nobody should be criticised for mentioning them, or examining someone's attitudes. It's not the same as excusing or justifying them.

I completely agree.

 

[Newthoughts]

I thought that LB was just a vaguely possible suspect based on previous record that they just got lucky on until I read the book written by the lead detective and a book written from another’s perspective (can’t recall the author) and realised the evidence was very persuasive re guilty.

I read her sisters book. He put the family thru hell with a mental health defence.

There is circumstantial evidence here as well.

 

[Tortoise]

Milly Dowler wasn't found for months after her disappearance in 2002. She was found in woodland so only her remains were found. Animals and time had removed all evidence. No cause of death could be given

Levi Bellfield wasn't convicted till 2010.

No CCTV remained. No forensics remained. Ex partners testimony of timing was allowed despite the time gap. He was convicted of her murder.

In 2016 he also confessed to her rape.

Based on what people here expect he wouldn't have been convicted

Milly was clearly murdered and her body disposed of. So a perpetrator was clearly responsible for murder, it was just a case of finding and proving who.

It isn't a fair assessment of the arguments put forward here in this case to say Bellfield wouldn't have been convicted.

MOO

 

[Alyce]

What happens if the jury are split 6/6 or similar. Is there a retrial or would that count as innocent (for the murder/manslaughter charge)?

It will be a hung jury and a retrial

 

[bos]

I hope that the reporter’s shorthand is up to recording Dr Lyall’s evidence. Surely it must be verbatim what is said rather than a summary which is an interpretation by the judge?

 

[Joolz1975]

I think he is very dismissive of the seriousness of the impact of his public masturbation - calling it silly , referring to it as his ‘problem’. Etc. You may be right that he is just trying to play it down, but it is my opinion that it really does come across that he doesn’t actually think of it as a big deal. The jury will have a far better view of him after seeing him in the witness stand, I can only form my opinion from what I read.

I dont think he thinks it is a big deal either. But I do think he knows what he did is very wrong

 

[PitchforkRed]

Surely the judge has to offer a majority verdict soon? I was expecting her to give them the option today. Is the judge ever informed of what the voting numbers in the room are?

 

[Chambo1994]

I think having another evidence re read this afternoon would mean we are unlikely to reach a verdict today IMO

 

[Alyce]

I think having another evidence re read this afternoon would mean we are unlikely to reach a verdict today IMO

I have seen it happen, that a re reading of evidence is the final piece the Jury need and the decision comes shortly after ( same day ).
However, in this case, I think you are right. Sadly, I don't see justice for Libby now - although I hope I am proven wrong.

 

[Lucy6226]

In regards to knowing something is wrong and feeling it is wrong, if you think of this is relation to say paedophiles - they know it's wrong, but most don't feel it's wrong. A lot feel like it is natural to be attracted to children/adolescents. So PR might have known his crimes and the rape were wrong, but we can't assume he felt they were wrong. I feel like he might have had no understanding of consent with a drunk woman. No excuses, just pondering and trying to understand possible scenarios. MOO

 

[ChiCubs2016]

I think he is very dismissive of the seriousness of the impact of his public masturbation - calling it silly , referring to it as his ‘problem’. Etc. You may be right that he is just trying to play it down, but it is my opinion that it really does come across that he doesn’t actually think of it as a big deal. The jury will have a far better view of him after seeing him in the witness stand, I can only form my opinion from what I read.

My apologies, I should have asked do you think he has some sort of disorder that would make him believe this is not wrong? I only ask because for me it is unfathomable that anyone would think doing this stuff was okay. This is a serious question. No disrespect.

 

[Ruthbullock]

I hope that the reporter’s shorthand is up to recording Dr Lyall’s evidence. Surely it must be verbatim what is said rather than a summary which is an interpretation by the judge?

I’m fairly sure they have someone who types up the whole case either using short hand or sheer speed. It’s a career and the people who do it are very competent- my mum was an audio typist for many years- literally typed up as people spoke.

 

[HLC35]

We know what PR did was wrong.

But...
I don’t think PR knew what he did was wrong. (Apart from the fact that he saw it as cheating on his wife)
I don’t think he thought masturbating in the street was wrong. He referred to these crimes as ‘silly’ showing no understanding for how they affected the women.
I don’t think he saw having sex with Libby was wrong.
I don’t think he thought at all that Libby would even remember it the next day so I don’t think he thought there was a risk he would be reported.

ETA what he thinks obviously doesn’t alter the crime - but it does eliminate a possible motive

I think he used the word ‘silly’ to manipulate the situation and offences, and build his narrative as the poor little family man with a silly problem who didn’t want to cheat on his wife or know what was illegal or not, poor silly little man. YEAH RIGHT!!!! Ripping off a woman’s letterbox, twice, leaving condoms on toys in a house he had broken into, the chasing women whilst masturbating, is not silly. His victims were scared. Terrified. He knew it when he was doing it. And he has since been served 8 years’ in prison for these ‘silly’ offences, with a judge calling him “dangerous”. As a convicted criminal currently serving time, it was silly, appalling, to use that as a defence for this horrendous crime against Libby.IMO

 

[Lucy6226]

Levi Bellfield had a fair trial with a defence where other alternatives were definitely explored. Including suicide and get father doing it.

Yes iirc her dad (step dad?) was top suspect at first due to his interest in BDSM... because all kinksters are murderers, right?!

 

[jamjim]

13:54
Jury asks another question

Justice Lambert has been spending lunch mulling over a query from the jury and is due to address them shortly.

Libby Squire murder trial updates as jury starts fifth day of talks

 

[Lucy6226]

13:54
Jury asks another question

Justice Lambert has been spending lunch mulling over a query from the jury and is due to address them shortly.

Libby Squire murder trial updates as jury starts fifth day of talks

Interesting that they keep asking to go over the evidence. Do we know any similar trials where this happened? I feel like others I have followed haven't done this??