Found Deceased UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #11 *ARREST*

[Chester]

They can’t prove he did anything at all to her...not even sure they can prove Libby was the woman he allegedly offered a ride.

4 elements necessary to prove abduction took place:

1. Someone was taken away

2. Force or fraud was used

3. Without the consent of the person taken away

4. Without lawful excuse


1. Easy

2. Um

3. Um

4. Um

So with three of the four essential elements needed to charge someone with abduction missing, I wonder why the CPS are reluctant to do so?

 

[Chester]

There have been cases where the arrests have been made on the grounds of suspicion for murder simply for being in the area at the time, thus likely to be the last likely person to have seen the victim (of course, hypothetically applying this to LS case, no disrespect to her family or her friends). These are perfectly legitimate grounds for arrest, no matter what charge, under PACE 1984 if the police do reasonably think they have cause to believe someone is involved in the commission of an offence.
Knowing this, it leads me to question why, if we are so sure PR was the last known person to see her, has a charge not been secured (obviously down to an ‘evidential gap’ as we call it) or an arrest of a more serious charge. If the narrative is so straightforward, why don’t we know what happens to Libby after PR? One would expect, and I think we would all be inclined to agree, there has been interference with the evidence.

See previous post as to answer.

PR was arrested on suspicion of abduction.

Charging someone with a crime is not the same as arresting them (thankfully).

I am intrigued as to your words '‘evidential gap’ as we call it", who is the 'we' in that?

 

[Happylappy101]

What's your line of work happy? If you don't mind me asking

I am a tax lawyer. Thrilling, I know.

4 elements necessary to prove abduction took place:

1. Someone was taken away

2. Force or fraud was used

3. Without the consent of the person taken away

4. Without lawful excuse


1. Easy

2. Um

3. Um

4. Um

So with three of the four essential elements needed to charge someone with abduction missing, I wonder why the CPS are reluctant to do so?

Actually, for the charge of false imprisonment under common law, the actus reus of confining someone without their consent be proven, which would be a simpler charge, one which the CPS could suggest as the lower substantive crime

 

[LucyRocket]

There have been cases where the arrests have been made on the grounds of suspicion for murder simply for being in the area at the time, thus likely to be the last likely person to have seen the victim (of course, hypothetically applying this to LS case, no disrespect to her family or her friends). These are perfectly legitimate grounds for arrest, no matter what charge, under PACE 1984 if the police do reasonably think they have cause to believe someone is involved in the commission of an offence.
Knowing this, it leads me to question why, if we are so sure PR was the last known person to see her, has a charge not been secured (obviously down to an ‘evidential gap’ as we call it) or an arrest of a more serious charge. If the narrative is so straightforward, why don’t we know what happens to Libby after PR? One would expect, and I think we would all be inclined to agree, there has been interference with the evidence.

I think you have to have a little bit more before the CPS would be happy to back a charge. At the moment, (summising from the family and MSM rumours which is all we have to go on), the suspect picked up an upset girl (possibly LE know this is LS), and LS now can't be traced. There would have to be at least one extra piece.. DNA, digital footprint, relationship history, known motive, to move forward. Otherwise it's just as ambiguous as saying I was the last person to leave my village store at 6pm and the cashier didn't make it home after locking up at 7

 

[Happylappy101]

4 elements necessary to prove abduction took place:

1. Someone was taken away

2. Force or fraud was used

3. Without the consent of the person taken away

4. Without lawful excuse


1. Easy

2. Um

3. Um

4. Um

So with three of the four essential elements needed to charge someone with abduction missing, I wonder why the CPS are reluctant to do so?

Sorry moreover, 1) it is evident she has been taken, 2) force may be mere coerciveness, 3) under common law, consent is ongoing, meaning she may have consented to get into the car, but that consent was later vitiated. Perfectly valid. 4)I can see no lawful excuse recognised under law (self defence, mistake, necessity etc) to excuse it.

 

[Happylappy101]

I think you have to have a little bit more before the CPS would be happy to back a charge. At the moment, (summising from the family and MSM rumours which is all we have to go on), the suspect picked up an upset girl (possibly LE know this is LS), and LS now can't be traced. There would have to be at least one extra piece.. DNA, digital footprint, relationship history, known motive, to move forward. Otherwise it's just as ambiguous as saying I was the last person to leave my village store at 6pm and the cashier didn't make it home after locking up at 7

Of course, I was trying to prove the point that there is evidence missing hence the lack of arrest or charge and I wanted to know why.

 

[Officer Dibble]

Hi and welcome @James Joyce . Interesting comparisons . You’re obviously not of the belief that the man was Pawel Relowicz then? Refreshing to hear an alternative.

Personally, I can’t read anything into the cigarette rolling(if that’s what he was doing) as it’s a familiar action that is performed quite often when someone is on edge due to nicotine withdrawal and then the actual smoking will help calm them. I think the rapid locking/unlocking of the car shows nerves.

@James Joyce he also texts with both thumbs - the footage has been cut up and shoved together/speeded up. We've all viewed it magnified and super slow. I personally think he is contemplating whilst smoking. I also all along from beginning have said I don't think he murderdered her, I think he there and maybe he was up to his usual no good but I don't think he necessarily was to blame for her disappearance. Although it looks more like perhaps he did but I still maintain he has got caught up in something far bigger than he ever could have thought of.

 

[Chester]

I am a tax lawyer. Thrilling, I know.


Actually, for the charge of false imprisonment under common law, the actus reus of confining someone without their consent be proven, which would be a simpler charge, one which the CPS could suggest as the lower substantive crime

So as a lawyer you should know that there is no such charge as false imprisonment in the UK.

In the UK it would be unlawful imprisonment which would have pretty much the same criteria for charging as abduction but without the no consent element needing to be proven.

Unlawful imprisonment would still require the Police and CPS to prove that:

1. A person's general freedom of movement was restricted by being kept in custody.

2. That the custody was deliberate.

3. That the custody was illegal or reckless.

So again using the Um test.

1. Um

2. Um

3. Um

 

[Officer Dibble]

Local Crime Information for Wellesley Avenue, Beverley Road, Hull, HU6 7LN - November 2018

This shows a map of crimes committed in Hull.

HOLY GUACAMOLE look at that pie chart

 

[Chester]

Of course, I was trying to prove the point that there is evidence missing hence the lack of arrest or charge and I wanted to know why.

You want to know why evidence is missing?

 

[ChiCubs2016]

HOLY GUACAMOLE look at that pie chart

I know, right! What is “anti-social behavior”?

 

[LucyRocket]

Of course, I was trying to prove the point that there is evidence missing hence the lack of arrest or charge and I wanted to know why.

I think that's just it. It looks like there is evidence that LS and PR were together, hence the suspicion of abduction arrest, and then nothing more. No evidence that she was alone or in the company of anyone else afterwards, but no evidence that she wasn't either. He's the only person who's been indicated in any way so far, and as this is all we have, this thread has, in the majority, been more about the crimes he is now charged with, even though they have no connection to LS disappearance

 

[LucyRocket]

You want to know why evidence is missing?

I do!

 

[Chester]

I do!

Bad people hid it.

 

[ChiCubs2016]

You want to know why evidence is missing?

I must be reading things differently because I read this a little different. Not sure if I can explain it, to me LE has evidence PR and LS were together from the bench to the car but nothing after, at least not anything substantial enough arrest PR for. This is odd to me because I would think there would be something. I think LE has more than we know. All MOO!

 

[Chester]

I must be reading things differently because I read this a little different. Not sure if I can explain it, to me LE has evidence PR and LS were together from the bench to the car but nothing after, at least not anything substantial enough arrest PR for. This is odd to me because I would think there would be something. I think LE has more than we know. All MOO!

That is a given. The Police have far far more than we know about.

Yes they have evidence that LS got into PR's car, there is little doubt.

After that.........

 

[Chester]

There absolutely is, it is both a tort and a crime under common law (hence you won’t find it in any statute books). There are many common law offences. Also, I am a taxation lawyer... though I have studied English criminal law for many, many years. You should be careful with your facts.
Anyway, that’s enough from this old chap. Goodnight all!

Thanks for the basic law lessons, not patronising at all.

Regardless of the label you hang on it the criteria are the same and were covered in the posts above. There is no proof of any of the three required elements.

 

[LucyRocket]

Bad people hid it.

I guess

 

[Chester]

Sorry moreover, 1) it is evident she has been taken, 2) force may be mere coerciveness, 3) under common law, consent is ongoing, meaning she may have consented to get into the car, but that consent was later vitiated. Perfectly valid. 4)I can see no lawful excuse recognised under law (self defence, mistake, necessity etc) to excuse it.

No need to be sorry.

I replied to 1. Easy. Your response implies I don't think she has been taken. I think everyone can agree she has been taken.

2. There is no proof of force, none whatsoever.

3. There is no proof of lack of consent. There is no proof of consent either, though it may be implied by the fact that LS willingly got into the car without being forced.

4. I won't repeat the long, long list of excuses that you got deleted but PR could pretty much say anything he wants to, there is nobody to refute it.

 

[Harmony 2]

We are moving to a new thread. This thread will close in 10 minutes.

UK - UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #12 *ARREST*