UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #22

[Newthoughts]

Exactly! I also think that his behaviour would be somewhat different than usual if this was his first murder.. I don’t think the rape would have particularly bothered him and he would have carried on with his normal nocturnal activities but surely if he’s just taken someone’s life for the first time ever there would be some behavioural changes? I don’t know, maybe he is just so utterly detached from any sense of normality that murder also wouldn’t phase him.

He knows he's raped someone yet is out engaging in his normal activities. That would be stupid unless you were very confident they wouldn't be found.

And once arrested you'd know that once Libby was found your DNA would be there. And why wouldn't she be found if you'd left her somewhere alive. So why not pretend you had consensual sex? Unless you knew she wouldn't be found and if she was you had good reason to think that that could have washed away?

And what could wash that away better than a river

 

[mrazda71]

I don’t think we know - the police won’t have had to trawl CCTV for his car for these offences as his DNA & possession of stolen articles were enough to place him at the scenes.

I wondered if it had been mentioned in his previous convictions not specifically this trial.

If he'd leave his car at home to go out perpetrating his previous crimes but on the occasion that he visited ORPF 3 times he chose to take his car ... it would indicate some pre-planning to me. You can't 'just' rape someone without getting seen anywhere. If he was intent on raping someone when/if opportunity arose then he'd need that car.

 

[Sarahjo]

He knows he's raped someone yet is out engaging in his normal activities. That would be stupid unless you were very confident they wouldn't be found.

And once arrested you'd know that once Libby was found your DNA would be there. And why wouldn't she be found if you'd left her somewhere alive. So why not pretend you had consensual sex? Unless you knew she wouldn't be found and if she was you had good reason to think that that could have washed away?

And what could wash that away better than a river

Yip, I can definitely see the argument for him being guilty of murder too.. you make good points here...

 

[Officer Dibble]

It would take less time to render someone unconscious.

The timing is very tight but possible.
A sexually charged, aggressive, strong man, the act itself could take just a couple of minutes, especially as Libby wasn't able to defend herself as well. I do think he may have covered her mouth to stop her screams, possibly resulting in unconsciousness, like others have suggested.

Due to the limited time spent in the park during the rape, he had no time to ascertain whether she was dead or not.
He'd had time to reflect on his actions at home and although still on a sexual high, needed to know whether she was still where he had left her.
If she hadn't have been, he could then concoct his story if she, say, went to the Police.
It's at this stage on the 3rd visit, presumed dead after being there for a couple of hours, he found her and decided to dump her in the river.
Either way he was going back to cover his tracks.
JMO. MOO.

Great post and one which I agree with.

 

[Chambo1994]

He knows he's raped someone yet is out engaging in his normal activities. That would be stupid unless you were very confident they wouldn't be found.

And once arrested you'd know that once Libby was found your DNA would be there. And why wouldn't she be found if you'd left her somewhere alive. So why not pretend you had consensual sex? Unless you knew she wouldn't be found and if she was you had good reason to think that that could have washed away?

And what could wash that away better than a river

But this is the thing... he may not have known he raped someone, in his opinion it was just sex. While we are all in agreement it was rape, to him it may not have been. IF she was not killed during the rape, then in his mind he’s just had sex with a woman and left her.

We have seen from his testimony and previous crimes that at the time he didn’t necessarily see what was wrong with what he was doing.

Remember we are all making assumptions based on the evidence we heard. Only two people know what actually happened and one of them isn’t here sadly.

 

[mrazda71]

I could understand him lying to police at first IF he truly thought they'd had consensual sex and he'd left her alive - no suffocating etc had taken place 'just' sex ... but, it becomes more sinister when he lies, lies, lies, lies, lies again.

However scared you were of your Mrs finding out you'd cheating ... you must surely be more scared of the police thinking you'd kidnapped and killed someone?

There's a point when, if you're not guilty, you start talking 'til your throat dries up... instead of 'no comment' ...

Do innocent people ever answer 'no comment' to all questions?

 

[tigerowl]

The simple fact that he didn't take his phone out with him indicates pre-planning to me. He knew it could track his movements so he left it at home.

The question is - what was he pre-planning? Masturbation and voyeurism, almost certainly. Rape if the opportunity presented itself, highly likely. Murder though, I don't think so.

I totally appreciate everyone's points about how this type of behaviour escalates and I agree. But unless there are previous rapes that we do not know about, I am struggling to see him move from his previous MO to an opportunistic rape to a murder in such a fell swoop.

I would not be surprised if in his deluded mind, he didn't really think he had done that much wrong by raping Libby. That's why it doesn't surprise me that he was out again later that night doing and looking for more of the same and covering his same old tried and trusted areas.

IMO, none of his previous MO, the timelines and lack of evidence in the public domain make me believe he murdered Libby. I hope the jury have been presented with way more than we are aware of though and that I am wrong and that Libby's parents, family and friends are able to get a result and some closure.

 

[ChiCubs2016]

But this is the thing... he may not have known he raped someone, in his opinion it was just sex. While we are all in agreement it was rape, to him it may not have been. IF she was not killed during the rape, then in his mind he’s just had sex with a woman and left her.

We have seen from his testimony and previous crimes that at the time he didn’t necessarily see what was wrong with what he was doing.

Remember we are all making assumptions based on the evidence we heard. Only two people know what actually happened and one of them isn’t here sadly.

I understand what you are saying. And although it states his crimes were “silly” if he did not think what he did was wrong why did he lie about everything until he was presented with evidence? If he did not think he did not do anything wrong, why didn’t he go to the police straight away once Libby was reported missing? Why lie to his friends? Why testify that his friend lied? MOO

 

[Chambo1994]

I could understand him lying to police at first IF he truly thought they'd had consensual sex and he'd left her alive - no suffocating etc had taken place 'just' sex ... but, it becomes more sinister when he lies, lies, lies, lies, lies again.

However scared you were of your Mrs finding out you'd cheating ... you must surely be more scared of the police thinking you'd kidnapped and killed someone?

There's a point when, if you're not guilty, you start talking 'til your throat dries up... instead of 'no comment' ...

Do innocent people ever answer 'no comment' to all questions?

I ALWAYS think this, whenever following a trial or watching a documentary, the second they start saying “no comment” I instantly think, well, they obviously have something to do with it.

If I got arrested and was innocent and my lawyer told me to “no comment” I’d tell him to go forth and multiply!! I’d literally give the police every minute detail of everything I know!

 

[Ruthbullock]

I could understand him lying to police at first IF he truly thought they'd had consensual sex and he'd left her alive - no suffocating etc had taken place 'just' sex ... but, it becomes more sinister when he lies, lies, lies, lies, lies again.

However scared you were of your Mrs finding out you'd cheating ... you must surely be more scared of the police thinking you'd kidnapped and killed someone?

There's a point when, if you're not guilty, you start talking 'til your throat dries up... instead of 'no comment' ...

Do innocent people ever answer 'no comment' to all questions?

You are right about the no comment- but we know he was guilty of something when he was interviewed. His previous crimes were yet to be uncovered.

 

[Chambo1994]

I understand what you are saying. And although it states his crimes were “silly” if he did not think what he did was wrong why did he lie about everything until he was presented with evidence? If he did not think he did not do anything wrong, why didn’t he go to the police straight away once Libby was reported missing? Why lie to his friends? Why testify that his friend lied? MOO

Without meaning to sound sarcastic... He may not have told the police everything because he “didn’t want his wife to find out he’s cheated”

I know none of us believe that to be true. But he is clearly a very simple man.

 

[Newthoughts]

I wondered if it had been mentioned in his previous convictions not specifically this trial.

If he'd leave his car at home to go out perpetrating his previous crimes but on the occasion that he visited ORPF 3 times he chose to take his car ... it would indicate some pre-planning to me. You can't 'just' rape someone without getting seen anywhere. If he was intent on raping someone when/if opportunity arose then he'd need that car.

Interesting point. What I can say is you can walk around about 90% of his previous crime locations in five minutes or less. Lots of them are at the end of his road. It'd almost be harder to drive to some of them. Based on that looking at the map it would be equally easy to have walked to the park

He said he didn't have a full licence. Wonder how long he's had the car

 

[Newthoughts]

But this is the thing... he may not have known he raped someone, in his opinion it was just sex. While we are all in agreement it was rape, to him it may not have been. IF she was not killed during the rape, then in his mind he’s just had sex with a woman and left her.

We have seen from his testimony and previous crimes that at the time he didn’t necessarily see what was wrong with what he was doing.

Remember we are all making assumptions based on the evidence we heard. Only two people know what actually happened and one of them isn’t here sadly.

I must admit I'd find it very hard to believe he didn't know it was rape. Why not stay in the warm car.

His previous crimes involved women who were clearly upset. He'd have known that was wrong IMO

 

[ChiCubs2016]

Without meaning to sound sarcastic... He may not have told the police everything because he “didn’t want his wife to find out he’s cheated”

I know none of us believe that to be true. But he is clearly a very simple man.

Here is the thing, I actually believe PR is a Psychopath so I honestly do not believe he was concerned about his wife. How could he be? He left her with two babies while he was out prowling. When he did arrive home that evening, he took a bath and watched *advertiser censored*. How often was his wife left alone during the night so he could go wank and terrorize women? No he didn’t care, he just wants the jury to see him as a good husband and father. He is neither. MOO

 

[Newthoughts]

I ALWAYS think this, whenever following a trial or watching a documentary, the second they start saying “no comment” I instantly think, well, they obviously have something to do with it.

If I got arrested and was innocent and my lawyer told me to “no comment” I’d tell him to go forth and multiply!! I’d literally give the police every minute detail of everything I know!

Me too. No comment instantly arouses suspicion.

 

[Newthoughts]

Here is the thing, I actually believe PR is a Psychopath so I honestly do not believe he was concerned about his wife. How could he be? He left her with two babies while he was out prowling. When he did arrive home that evening, he took a bath and watched *advertiser censored*. How often was his wife left alone during the night so he could go wank and terrorize women? No he didn’t care, he just wants the jury to see him as a good husband and father. He is neither. MOO

I agree. Zero empathy for starters.

 

[tedtink]

I understand what you are saying. And although it states his crimes were “silly” if he did not think what he did was wrong why did he lie about everything until he was presented with evidence? If he did not think he did not do anything wrong, why didn’t he go to the police straight away once Libby was reported missing? Why lie to his friends? Why testify that his friend lied? MOO

Just because he may have 'thought' he hadn't done anything wrong, he would have known that murder/rape is a criminal offence.
It's typical of this type of offender to try and 'minimise' their actions in their heads, this is partly why those crimes can escalate.
JMO

 

[Sooty]

I could understand him lying to police at first IF he truly thought they'd had consensual sex and he'd left her alive - no suffocating etc had taken place 'just' sex ... but, it becomes more sinister when he lies, lies, lies, lies, lies again.

However scared you were of your Mrs finding out you'd cheating ... you must surely be more scared of the police thinking you'd kidnapped and killed someone?

There's a point when, if you're not guilty, you start talking 'til your throat dries up... instead of 'no comment' ...

Do innocent people ever answer 'no comment' to all questions?

I believe the ‘no comment’ interviews were after he was in prison following the earlier trial. Perhaps someone could confirm.
If so, he is the last person to see her, he now is recognised as a dangerous sexual deviant, already with a hefty prison sentence and the police are shaping their evidence around a possible murder. He is not going to win even if he starts singing like a canary.
MOO

 

[Winterbells]

He said he didn't have a full licence. Wonder how long he's had the car

Did he?
I thought he said he was still practising driving, or words to that effect. I'd be surprised if he's driving around without a license, although he does seem dangerously drawn to risk taking.

 

[ChiCubs2016]

Just because he may have 'thought' he hadn't done anything wrong, he would have known that murder/rape is a criminal offence.

Exactly. But I do not think the thought he did not do anything wrong. I believe he thinks he is spinning his lies to match the evidence. You can see how his stories change as new evidence is presented. 5 stories all laid out in court and after each new version he stated the previous was “not correct”. MOO