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

[Loobyloo]

Sorry might have already been mentioned as not had chance to follow everything today...bloody homeschool.
Has it been put to him why he didn’t use a condom during ‘sex’ with Libby?
Surely if it was consensual as he says and didn’t want to cheat on his wife he would have done.

It hasn't been asked in court, but there's been discussion here on & off through the day. The first few hits on this search will take you to the previous comments:
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/search/86280546/?q=condom&t=post&o=date&c[thread]=557296

Also have the defence named any other people they are bringing forward?
again sorry if these things have been discussed, just give me a hint with a page no!

If they have named any other witnesses, it hasn't been mentioned by the HDM reporter.

 

[Cherwell]

His only chance of gaining any less time from the courts is maybe pleading guilty now to raping her intentionally.

He wouldn't get anything off now, far too late in the day.

Adios.
I think ....im done, been interesting.

Nooooo, don't go. You are very welcome here.

 

[JosieJo]

The meaning of beyond reasonable doubt has haunted many a law student. Light read article for anyone interested.

Judges told to stop using 'beyond reasonable doubt' because jurors don't understand what it means | Daily Mail Online

When I did jury service 2 years ago the judge told us not to think of beyond reasonable doubt..he told us we must be sure they did it if not should be not guilty

 

[Fidobell]

His defence must be sitting with their hands covering their faces crying in despair.

Facepalm !

 

[JosieJo]

I'm struggling with why he would single out the green shed as the location of the rape unless it's actually true. Claiming that the 'consensual sex' took place somewhere in the park would make much more sense (and we have mostly, I think, been assuming that the real attack did take place in the park). Admitting to a park location would make his claim that he left Libby alive, and the implication that she must have either deliberately or accidentally made her own way to the river, more plausible - he could have claimed that she refused to leave with him, for instance, so he had to leave her. Singling out the green shed makes it harder for anyone to believe that Libby walked away from the lights and into the darkness of her own accord. So, why lie about the location in a way that weakens his own case? Or, by giving that location, is he perhaps banking on it making the timings to and from the river even tighter? Yet the defence haven't (so far) queried the timing element of it at all - presumably because if their case is that he was not in the park at that time, the timing interval of how long to the river bank etc is irrelevant?

I think there may be a grain of truth in the rape location if nothing else. He may have struggled to 'contain' himself for long enough to get Libby into the park. We know how badly incapacitated she was, but he didn't necessarily know the full extent of it; he may have though that he didn't stand a chance of getting her into the park without a struggle, and opted for right outside the car instead. If Libby ran from the car and he immediately caught her, this location would also make sense - for rape, but not necessarily for the murder charge. If this location IS true, then it gives rise to more questions than answers about what really happened. If it ISN'T true, then I don't get the point of the lie.

Exactly that

 

[JosieJo]

For those asking why some feel there is a problem with timing ...this is why I do

The prosecution who wants to prove it possible say 7.5 min so thats going to be best case scenario

Again the prosecution say to walk from car to river 4 minutes ..there would be no "walking"
Libby was zigzagging and falling and likely struggling..or he would be carrying her while she was struggling...that imo makes it 4 mins at best..even if she run with fright ..he would have caught up with her in seconds so I do not think at any point running would give any gain in time

To get someone pinned down and for him to (let's say unzip etc) while struggling..its likely she did struggle as scratches and bruises..then very quickly do the deed ..even if seconds you would still need a certain amount of time to asphyxiate...then check they were dead ...2 mins at very best for that group of actions

Let's go best case again and say she was attacked as near to the river without being caught on yeast factory cctv ..pick her up walk a very short distance and place her in the river...30 seconds at best

Prosecution (again best case scenario) say running 1.5 to 2 minutes...the screaming witness saw him at 3 points "walking quickly" ...not running (the defence corrected the prosecution to say he was not running) so likely 2.5 minutes at very best

Imo all the above are at very best ...its all about the distance not the time to rape and kill

Just by distance and maths there is a problem

We are up to 9 minutes!

Add snow and ice ...add inclines ....the photos Corneileus did showed the distance and the slopes and terrain and compounded the problem more to me..not even added time on for that

Plus the prosecution seem to feel there will be doubts..specifically mentioned in opening..if the prosecution feel there will be doubts..why would anyone not have at least a slight concern

Based on true distance and the claims above by the prosecution on travel times across the park I would say how can anyone not have even a slight concern

He arrived at the park and 11 mins later he was back at home putting his feet up after driving home!

 

[CrimeAway]

Libby had hypothermia...what chance would she have had staying alive on the ground or in the water...that 30/60 min timescale...would she have perished faster in fast flowing almost freezing water (the current is that powerful it cant freeze like Barmston drain does)... water or earth...30 minutes...how long does a survival expert say hypothermia takes to set in when submerged in cold water. I am just thrown by this so called experts knowledge of the temp of the river Hull on a freezing cold jan/feb morning, snow about.

Why say this? just puzzling because its rubbish.

@Corneileus, it is normal for us to perceive or think that the water temperature is lower than it actually is.
Water has a higher heat capacity than air, so that it removes our body heat from us much faster and more efficiently, than if we were surrounded by the same air temperature (10*C of water will feel much colder than 10*C air, because we are losing body heat faster).
This is why large commercial buildings in hot countries use water chillers to dissipate (get rid of) heat from their air conditioning systems instead of simple air compressors that are more commonly used in residential systems.

Properties of air vs water

 

[LucyRocket]

Just caught up thank you @jamjim

My thoughts from today;

He doesn't answer anything. He's the most pointless person I've ever seen on the stand. Although we did get a little more than that is correct, that is not correct and that's my problem from him today.

He said his wife did ask where he was going at nights and he would lie to her. What on earth did he tell her?

What was his habit of leaving his phone at home? Only that night, took it in days left home at nights?

He says he didn't take her to a police station because all he could say in English was hello and how are you? Yet he has so much conversation with Libby; "What's up?" "...I said if she wanted to give me her address I had a car right round the corner on Haworth Street. I said I would help her." Told her the other cars weren't his car. Asked for her address several times. “I believe that she understood everything that I was saying to her because when I told her my car was there and I needed her address then she would follow me." “I asked her whether everything was ok with her" So she understood all these things he was saying to her that he couldn't say because they are not hello or how are you, plus she is drunk and hasn't got a clue what's going on, but she can understand the man who doesn't speak any English perfectly fine, but the police probably wouldn't.

Brief sex until ejaculation with a stranger by a sober, married man, was he not concerned about pregnancy? This is the point which pushes me towards guilty murder

 

[wilkela]

Not even if the act of rape and murder/causing her to become unconscious took less than 1 minute? (which is reasonable to suggest)
Leaving 6 and a half minutes for any movement over and back across the park? Whilst fueled on adrenaline and possibly panic?

I cant imagine someone who didn't plan murder would be able that quick thinking what to do with unconscious body,most likely he would left her there than pick her up and run to the river in the darkness (and then comeback for what after 2h?)

 

[Newthoughts]

1. I find it more plausible than the other lies. A tenfoot with no people around and his easiest opportunity to rape her. No need to go into the park to do what he came for.
2. Do you know ORPF personally? I don't mean this snottily. I just think that if you have actually walked that bit of the park regularly and are familiar with the river access there you couldn't not have an issue with the timings.

His easiest opportunity to rape is in his car.

If you know you've raped somebody without a condom who is now walking round with your DNA or has fallen down somewhere and is likely to be found - the very least you do when arrested is tell your solicitor who would advise you to admit to that bit.

PR knew that park. He'd flown a drone over it. He'd visited earlier that evening.

Libby could barely walk without falling over. She's just been raped and she chooses to leave a brightly lit street and go to a dark park. Gets across it?

 

[Newthoughts]

I understand that
But the police have charged him with murder so they can’t have a problem with timings.

They have. Just to elaborate further - the cash strapped CPS, packed with expert lawyers have looked at the evidence and said charge him with rape and murder.

 

[Chambo1994]

How would they know anything about anyone who entered the park that night or really really importantly, who was already on the park. I do not see the time for both pawel and libby to make it to the river bank. this is my neighbourhood, i swear to you i am not a pawel sympathizer/thiser (my spellings got crap) the timescales do not add up. i say this with full confidence and so do my older grandad mates who do not use the internet and they live in the area libby was ...murdered? kidnapped twice? Every park in hull is dangerous, especially pearson park on a night, queenie park and beresford park/oak road fields (exact same park but two names). there is every chance there were one or more other dangerous evil men on that park the night pawel claims he left libby. i beleive it a real possibility.

They’ll know who went in and out the park, the same way they know PR was in the park earlier in the evening.

CCTV.

They’ll have searched hours before and hours after and the fact they focussed in on PR shows that there was no one else in the park of interest.

One part that I have thought and that bugs me is the thought her body could have been dumped at a later date. I mentioned it when the pathologist was on the stand. But we’ll never know the answer due to the damage suffered in the water

 

[Newthoughts]

what you described it is planning next step when opportunity arises
but it is something different when you leaving house with plan in your head "tonight I will find woman and I will rape her and then I will put her body in the river at 2:30 when tide rise "
he isn't that sophisticated ,he went out watching people through the window and masturbate on front pretty girls ,then he spotted Libby and decided use her but he didn't plan it it just happened

someone asked why I think it is impossible he raped ,killed and disposed her body in that short time,
I think I answered this question before, she didn't have any deadly injury, he didn't hit her with something heavy ,he didn't stabbed her ,suffocate someone takes more than 1min ,person can lose consciousness but not be killed in seconds plus she was screaming(apparently for few minutes) so she wasn't suffocated
if she would run from him, fight with him for her life there would be some evidence on the ground, blood ,hair mess on the ground in general - I didn't hear anything about it (yet)
there was dark ,even you know place it is completely different perception in the dark, running there in darkness with body over shoulders wouldn't be easy ,I bet he will probably fell few times ,slip ,stumble over wood, iced mud ,it wasn't straight easy path.
I just don't see how he could do this especially when he just decided rape her because he had opportunity not because he planned this

Plans don't have to be sophisticated tho.

He saw opportunity so why not rape her in Endsleigh Court? Why not in his car? If that wasn't an opportunity then keep moving

Planning was there when he physically took her from that place to another place. Without hesitation at all according to timing. That's possibly all it would need

But more planning was evident in the fact he was there at all and had leaflets of student housing in his sex toy drawer.

With no phone

And that he'd already been there and had drone footage

Planning was evident in the fact he was confident he had no need to pretend he'd had sex with her. Why - you've raped someone who has disappeared. If she'd wandered it was highly likely she'd be found with your DNA.

He clearly was confident she wouldn't be which is why he's on the stand now having to explain that DNA

It doesn't mean he written detailed plans that night to go out and do something it means once an opportunity arose he knew what to do. It means he didn't act the minute he saw a vulnerable girl. He chose to take her elsewhere.

 

[Newthoughts]

That's exactly what I think and wrote earlier - PR started and sb else finished.

On what evidence? And how likely is that?

The police will have trawled every bit of CCTV around from his house to the park once they knew where he'd gone.

The only thing that is remotely possible IMO is if someone helped out entering the park by different route. But I don't think any friend would do that

I suppose that does only leave the option of a family member I guess. If he has any in the area? But how would they do it?

 

[Newthoughts]

If someone else had raped her after PR wouldn’t their dna be in her too?
If they used a condom there’d be evidence of spermicide in the findings.
This wasn’t mentioned.
If they didn’t rape her they just fancied throwing her in the river, just for kicks, despite knowing they could face 25 years for doing so?

Good points

You'd have to have someone who got their kicks terrorising and raping women and someone who got their kicks throwing people in rivers out in the same place on the same night.

The only way for that scenario to remotely work is if a friend or family member helped. I don't think a friend would. I'm struggling with how a family member could given that police had checked everything

 

[Sooty]

My thoughts about timing are that it’s not only doubtful in the time frame, but also why? Why the rush? If you had murdered someone, or thought you had, as quickly as that, within a minute according to some - wouldn’t you think you would make sure that they were well and truly dead - watch for a while, make sure there’s no chance of coming around, or get out the water? He didn’t have a bus to catch - he was back out and about, not in a rush any other time.
I suggest that you would be more inclined to ensure the completion at the time of the action rather than return a couple of hours later.

 

[Newthoughts]

Who knows what creeps meet there at night? Sb mentioned here this is a "dogging site".

I must admit it's only very recently that any mention of it being a dogging site has arisen. Despite it being an area of interest for two years so I'm very confused.

Do you we have any clear evidence it was? And where were they that night?

 

[mrjitty]

I only see his disastrous testimony and lies consolidating the rape charge, not the murder.

I get your point, but for me the defence should have kept the park as a black box and not allow the prosecution to delve into it on X

Now he has essentially admitted key elements of the rape which were opaque before

But worse he needed to take the jury into his confidence, and give them some truth, to have any hope of standing this version up. Now he's gone and lied to them again which proves he is hiding something IMO

Murder in this case is guesswork, unlike other cases without a definitive cause of death but where the victim could not possibly have done to themselves what the evidence shows - like burial or fire.

I guess I see it as inference rather than guesswork.

He is concealing what he did to her in the park, and then she died shortly after.

For me the defence needs to point to an evidential foundation on those timings that cast real doubt on whether murder was possible. Because if not for the timing question I am 100% guilty on the murder count right now.

 

[Newthoughts]

Yes I agree. Libby's core temperature would have been lower too, so I think it would be less of a shock . You only have to watch that celebrity SAS programe with Ant Middleton. He has them constantly jumping in cold water . Cant see them allowing celebrities to do it that if it was lethal.

And the traditional new years day swim in the freezing cold Thame.

 

[mrjitty]

I wish we had a full transcript of the evidence