Newthoughts
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2019
- Messages
- 2,158
- Reaction score
- 14,055
Deleted by me - duplicate
Last edited:
Yes. Lots I'm afraidPersonally (on the limited reporting we've heard) I'm not sure I can attribute much weight to any of the witnesses timings for the screams. But I am more interested in the man seen by Sam Alford. If he isn't PW who the hell is he? If his appearance is nothing like PW I fear everyone in Hull has cause to be very worried.
If he was not PW, given this sighting was directly after the screams, does this not strongly suggest this man is responsible for poor Libby's death?
But if this is so do we not encounter a similarly tight time window to the 7.5 minutes available to PR only a few minutes earlier? After all, if PW is to be believed neither he nor Libby entered the park by the time he left at 12.19 am. So, in the maybe 10 minutes between 12.19 and the sighting of this man leaving the park is it conceivable Libby could have left Oak Road, somehow been attacked by him, gone through the park and been put in the river, and the man have time to cover the ground back from the river to Oak Road?
Alternatively of course PW is lying and he left Libby in the park, which would then provide a greater window for the random stranger to attack her, put her in the water etc. and make his way back to Oak Road. But if he has felt the need to lie why? What is he trying to hide?
Finally, I submit PW can hardly expect the jury to determine that telling them he didn't enter the park was a lie, and then apply this to his advantage by determining this then allows for the possibility of a random stranger to be responsible for Libby's death.
Anyone have any thoughts?
Yes me too.Has the defence brought this up as a possibility ? They are all aware of the available cctv footage. Nothing of this kind, ie another murderer, has been even suggested. All circumstantial and other evidence point to PR and only him as the perpetrator. I prefer to stick to the facts for now instead of adding another hypothetical person to the equation.
We ready know he was wearing jeans because the police have said and forensics have said they'd been washed but the identified grass stains. At her bottom they look tight and tapered.Oh, yes and I agree, but if Sam Alford was describing a different and innocent bloke, that might explain the clothing discrepancies (ie. tight jeans vs joggers, camo jacket vs bomber jacket) . Not that I think PR was wearing tight jeans and a bomber jacket - I'd describe him as wearing joggers; tapered from the knee down, with quite a loose side pocket that he put something into on spidercam and a fleece top, not a jacket at all.
My comments were basically just to respond to @Steve2021 's request for thoughts.
Oh, yes and I agree, but if Sam Alford was describing a different and innocent bloke, that might explain the clothing discrepancies (ie. tight jeans vs joggers, camo jacket vs bomber jacket) . Not that I think PR was wearing tight jeans and a bomber jacket - I'd describe him as wearing joggers; tapered from the knee down, with quite a loose side pocket that he put something into on spidercam and a fleece top, not a jacket at all.
My comments were basically just to respond to @Steve2021 's request for thoughts.
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.
I don’t know if he is a very simple man or not; I think he might be.
If he is though it will be clear that he is to the jury. Likewise, if they see him as sophisticated, cunning or manipulative that will likely come across too.
We have seen from the Croda video that even in the early hours of the morning there is the occasional person who walks or cycles along Oak Road. Unless the sex was truly consensual, which I consider preposterous, is it conceivable PW would rape poor Libby by the side of the road when if anyone came along in the 7.5 minutes he was there he'd be done for? Even if he fled his car number etc would be clocked by the passer by. I'm increasingly feeling he must be lying again and that he did enter the park.
Can anyone clarify this?
I don't believe he is a simple man at all. In fact, I think he is pretty clever and devious because until he was looked into by the police regarding Libby no one was even aware of his previous crimes some of which were pretty brazen!
He seems to toss her faux leather jacket in the rear of the Astra on spidercam. From the Haworth St and Tesco cctv his car interior light is not set to operate on opening the car (on purpose during his night time prowling?) Car upholstery seems to be dark also, maybe he missed the fact Libby's jacket was in the rear when he returned from the second Oak Rd visit to Raglan St.
Does anyone have times and locations where he was seen after his third Oak Rd visit where he could conceivably have got rid of Libby's jacket prior to returning to Raglan St?
IIRC it was in the police interview when he said he was "still learning" to drive. Maybe he meant that he was "still learning" his way around the streets, but was obviously getting plenty of practice in at night.Can anyone clarify this?
Pretty sure on spider cam - he's NOT wearing joggers
I agree, it’s not a perfect fit of evidence. The 7.5 minutes is the time his car was parked up. The screaming begins at 12.14 and his car is pulling away at 12.19 and is in Beverley Road CCTV at 12.20.I think the scream testimonies need to be considered carefully - but I’m not sure if they are particularly helpful to the prosecution case. I will detail Mr Alfords as this is the testimony that the prosecution have chosen to use for ‘best fit’. They could have used statements from all parties, but that would only have added more doubt to the case for murder.
12:14 is the starting point. Mr Alford checked a text. I presume the time the text was received is his reference point, but it could be that it was the time he read it.
A ‘minute or two later’ he hears the first scream. So 12:15 - 12:16
He heard more screams and the looks out the window, but can’t see anyone in the park.
He states the screams went on ‘between 4 and 7 minutes’ - so by his reckoning we are now at somewhere between 12:19 and 12:23
after the last scream he went to the toilet and after that returned to the bedroom and continued to look out the window. Is it fair to add a minute here? 12:20 - 12:24
after a further ‘three or four minutes’ he sees a ‘male walking off the park .... purposefully.....wearing ‘fitted dark coloured joggers’ or ‘cuffed jeans’ and a ‘bomber style jacket’. 12:23 - 12:28
We have seen from the Croda video that even in the early hours of the morning there is the occasional person who walks or cycles along Oak Road. Unless the sex was truly consensual, which I consider preposterous, is it conceivable PW would rape poor Libby by the side of the road when if anyone came along in the 7.5 minutes he was there he'd be done for? Even if he fled his car number etc would be clocked by the passer by. I'm increasingly feeling he must be lying again and that he did enter the park.