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

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
do I blame anybody?
I'm just saying it is bad move because he could be wrongly understood by jury (his explanations could be wrongly interpreted when he use inappropriate words)
yes "stupid, thoughtless or foolish " are also inappropriate but it is what he knows and that's what he used because his vocabulary is poor .
he didn't thought about it ,in my opinion it means he is not that brainy like you try portrait him, he is simple man not sophisticated murder who planned murder and studied river tides
I don't think anything he's said could be misunderstood. He terrorised and followed women. He didn't run away when spotted and appeared to get a kick out of fear.

He raped a vulnerable young woman. And he cleverly stole words used by previous witnesses

Nothing there to misunderstand? You don't need to be clever to know you don't do those things.

He will have had an interpreter.
 
Hopefully Mr Wright will go into more detail tomorrow regarding his return visit to ORPF.

This croda cctv still bugs me. If the police have checked all the cctv and people say there is plenty dotted around. Why haven't these people been identified ( to our knowlege).

Perhaps they're nothing to do with the case and were eliminated from the enquiry very early one. If so, there's no reason we'd hear any more about it.
 
do I blame anybody?
I'm just saying it is bad move because he could be wrongly understood by jury (his explanations could be wrongly interpreted when he use inappropriate words)
yes "stupid, thoughtless or foolish " are also inappropriate but it is what he knows and that's what he used because his vocabulary is poor .
he didn't thought about it ,in my opinion it means he is not that brainy like you try portrait him, he is simple man not sophisticated murder who planned murder and studied river tides
I've never said he planned the murder nor than he studied tidal waves. Nonetheless I do think he murdered Libby and rather than being a simple man as suggested by you I feel he was a dangerous predator as evidenced by the crimes he has admitted and been convicted of. Personally, rather than a language barrier, I think he is facing the impossible task of trying to unravel his own lies.
 
do I blame anybody?
I'm just saying it is bad move because he could be wrongly understood by jury (his explanations could be wrongly interpreted when he use inappropriate words)
yes "stupid, thoughtless or foolish " are also inappropriate but it is what he knows and that's what he used because his vocabulary is poor .
he didn't thought about it ,in my opinion it means he is not that brainy like you try portrait him, he is simple man not sophisticated murder who planned murder and studied river tides

He is just showing the jury the person he is. He had the opportunity to be honest with the police. He has chosen to lie at every interview.
He might not be academically clever,but he is certainly a devious predator whose only thought is to lie himself out of trouble .
 
I personally wouldn't take part of this trial if I would be Libby mum it would be too much for me
Can you explain me if every case in uk is open to public(I mean if media always are invited and reporting all details(unpleasant, disturbing and often offensive about victim )?

It is unimaginable. But being in the situation of having a child of yours lose their life in this way is an unimaginable horror too. @elliefant has put it really well. When parents are in this situation it's incredible the resolve, that's not even the right word, a parent has when it comes to the worst thing happening to their child. You have to live through it, you have no choice in that, you have no control that it happened and you have no control over the processes that happen afterwards, and even if you are not in court you can't shield yourself from the details. Being there in the moment you are taking control. I have only ever had one trial where the parent didn't attend court. That was the right decision for her. I think she had some mental health issues prior to her child's murder and I don't think she could have coped with the formal expectations of attending the courtroom. She also had no support to attend because her child's father was the murderer, and she didn't have a partner. But this brought her so many challenges that other families didn't have. I would travel from the courthouse each day and go straight to meet with her to debrief her, but she had no control over when she would be exposed to details which would be a completely different level of shock and trauma. For example, I would warn her that the press were releasing certain bodycam footage on a certain day, and those words might not mean much, but later that evening she would walk into the living room carrying the children's supper and be confronted with those images on her TV screen completely unprepared for.
 
do I blame anybody?
I'm just saying it is bad move because he could be wrongly understood by jury (his explanations could be wrongly interpreted when he use inappropriate words)
yes "stupid, thoughtless or foolish " are also inappropriate but it is what he knows and that's what he used because his vocabulary is poor .
he didn't thought about it ,in my opinion it means he is not that brainy like you try portrait him, he is simple man not sophisticated murder who planned murder and studied river tides
I've just read over today's reporting again and I think the answers he gave were probably through the translator, even though I can see the standard was not that high. I wonder if it was more perhaps that the translator was not as good as the one he had yesterday. I think the answers were probably better than his own standard of English, at a guess.

For instance - I think these answers probably didn't come from him directly -

He says the pair had consensual sexual intercourse and he left her alive.

He said: “She was crying a lot. She was desperate. She wanted to go back to her mum’s house.”

Relowicz replied: “She wanted to go home and that’s where she transferred me and I took her there.”

Relowicz has replied: “She was surely vulnerable, she was drunk.”

Relowicz said: “When I first met her, I was asking her about the address but she didn’t tell me where it was so the next thing I thought was to take her to a police station but I didn’t go because of my English.”

Relowicz said: “I had sex with her but it wasn’t dark. From what I believe there were street lights there.”

He said: “She was simply a beautiful woman.”


etc
 
He is just showing the jury the person he is. He had the opportunity to be honest with the police. He has chosen to lie at every interview.
He might not be academically clever,but he is certainly a devious predator whose only thought is to lie himself out of trouble .

Exactly! Its all Self preservation, yet hes trying to portray himself as a caring family man who regretted cheating on his wife. Regretted it that much he left his wife with his children again and went masterbating on the street .
 
It is unimaginable. But being in the situation of having a child of yours lose their life in this way is an unimaginable horror too. @elliefant has put it really well. When parents are in this situation it's incredible the resolve, that's not even the right word, a parent has when it comes to the worst thing happening to their child. You have to live through it, you have no choice in that, you have no control that it happened and you have no control over the processes that happen afterwards, and even if you are not in court you can't shield yourself from the details. Being there in the moment you are taking control. I have only ever had one trial where the parent didn't attend court. That was the right decision for her. I think she had some mental health issues prior to her child's murder and I don't think she could have coped with the formal expectations of attending the courtroom. She also had no support to attend because her child's father was the murderer, and she didn't have a partner. But this brought her so many challenges that other families didn't have. I would travel from the courthouse each day and go straight to meet with her to debrief her, but she had no control over when she would be exposed to details which would be a completely different level of shock and trauma. For example, I would warn her that the press were releasing certain bodycam footage on a certain day, and those words might not mean much, but later that evening she would walk into the living room carrying the children's supper and be confronted with those images on her TV screen completely unprepared for.
If there was a love button... perfectly put
 
Potentially not, no.
It would depend on where he put her in and if she was indeed 'placed' or something less respectful
With the best will in the world- that would take some effort to throw a 5’7” women who had limbs flopping around a few metres over the reeds. The place at the boathouse whilst clear entry to the water, still would have caught a body dumped from the edge as the reeds were either side.
 
Silly thought, but we are 4 days away from February 1st and I wonder what stage the trial will be at on that day

yes, that’s a very sad thought. Been on my mind too.

Defence finish tomorrow.
Maybe even Prosecution closing argument tomorrow afternoon ?
Defence closing on Thursday, followed by Judge’s summing up.
Friday Jury out.
On that schedule, I could see a verdict on Monday.
 
Silly thought, but we are 4 days away from February 1st and I wonder what stage the trial will be at on that day

Three more days this week. Perhaps one more day for the cross examination. 2 days for summing up. Perhaps judge directing Jury on Monday morning 1st Feb and jury sent out to deliberate Monday lunchtime.
 
With the best will in the world- that would take some effort to throw a 5’7” women who had limbs flopping around a few metres over the reeds. The place at the boathouse whilst clear entry to the water, still would have caught a body dumped from the edge as the reeds were either side.


I don't recall suggesting that he had 'thrown' her 'over the reeds' ...
 
I don't think it will be a quick verdict.

If I was on that jury I would have to say I don't like him, I think he's dangerous, I think he raped her, in so much as there has been evidence to support that Libby was incapable of giving consent but I have been shown no evidence to support that he murdered her.

I'm not defending him before anyone jumps on me - but with what has been reported from court, I couldn't convict him of murder. I hope the jury have seen much more than I have.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
174
Guests online
1,934
Total visitors
2,108

Forum statistics

Threads
600,116
Messages
18,104,007
Members
230,991
Latest member
lyle.person1
Back
Top