UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23

[JosieJo]

The absence of searches would similarly infer he was in no doubt that it was rape

Why ?

 

[JosieJo]

Why ?

Sex was a big part of his life and "hobbies" ..he was a vile pervert..he Googled sex regularly.. most people would know without googling ..I can just claim it was consensual

Murder and bodies in the river and dna and tides etc ...would require googling

 

[Steve2021]

...her ending up near the river has no time limit as the prosecco does ..a tight one.
She could have wandered around the park for hours before having to reach the water in theory

I take your point and should have clarified in my post that you would need to ask not only if Libby could make it from the road to the river, but do so fairly quickly...she'd have to be fairly quick to get there in time to start screaming by the time the witnesses report hearing them...max 11 minutes, minimum 0 minutes depending on which witness you go with

 

[Steve2021]

...her ending up near the river has no time limit as the prosecco does ..a tight one.
She could have wandered around the park for hours before having to reach the water in theory

I take your point and should have clarified in my post that you would need to ask not only if Libby could make it from the road to the river, but do so fairly quickly...she'd have to be fairly quick to get there in time to start screaming by the time the witnesses report hearing them...max 11 minutes, minimum 0 minutes depending on which witness you go with. In other words she does have as you say all night to fall in the river but she she doesn't have long to get near it and start screaming.

 

[elliefant]

I know these are extreme cases but Ted Bundy and Dennis Radar started out with Voyeurism. PR has been doing this for at least 18 months. We do not know of anything prior but it could have started much sooner. I do not think it is unreasonable to think rape and murder were PR’s next steps. I am grateful for the invention of CCTV because it may help prevent serial rapist and killers from going on for years and years leaving a trail of victims. MOO

I always think of Colonel Russell (Williams?) when I think of PR’s prior offending, they are very similar in their voyeurism and calling cards etc. Colonel Russell also went on to rape and kill.

 

[tedtink]

Sex was a big part of his life and "hobbies" ..he was a vile pervert..he Googled sex regularly.. most people would know without googling ..I can just claim it was consensual

Murder and bodies in the river and dna and tides etc ...would require googling

EDT
Not necessarily.
That would be like saying no murders or rapes and the disposal of bodies, ever took place since time began, before the invention of the internet.

 

[JosieJo]

I take your point and should have clarified in my post that you would need to ask not only if Libby could make it from the road to the river, but do so fairly quickly...she'd have to be fairly quick to get there in time to start screaming by the time the witnesses report hearing them...max 11 minutes, minimum 0 minutes depending on which witness you go with. In other words she does have as you say all night to fall in the river but she she doesn't have long to get near it and start screaming.

We have no idea though if she could still wander around not screaming

 

[JosieJo]

Not necessarily.
That would be like saying no murders or rapes ever took place since time began, before the invention of the internet.

Not at all ...but his Internet searches were presented at court so form part of the evidence...im not sure we can compare it to an era when something was not possible

 

[Steve2021]

Respectfully snipped by me.


....left her safe and well, she must have just fallen in the river, that's her bad luck, hardly his fault, he's not her dad, he's not responsible for her,

I wonder if PR said something very similar to his barrister when discussing his case.

Spot on. Thinking back to his casual attitude to when the police asked him where she was, that's probably exactly what he told his barrister...who no doubt didn't believe it for a minute.

 

[Newthoughts]

Also picking up on one of MrJitty's recent posts, for the defence to put it to the jury, you've heard my client's evidence, firstly the sex was initiated by Libby, secondly there is insufficient evidence to conclude he didn't reasonably believe she had the legal capacity to consent, thirdly the sex took place by the side of the road....but on the other hand if you conclude that's a complete pack of lies try this one, he raped her in the park but left her safe and well, she must have just fallen in the river, that's her bad luck, hardly his fault, he's not her dad, he's not responsible for her, you might feel him a tad ungallant, or even morally reprehensible, but that doesn't make him a murderer. How well is that going to go down? Moreso as his evidence is the polar opposite to this I do wonder whether as a matter of law they are permitted to advance this totally unsupported speculation, and whether the jury are permitted to consider it?

He didn't raise that as an option in court and neither did his defence. In fact he denies it.

I would assume it would have had to have been raised by the defence to allow the prosecution to question him on it. I'd be surprised if either the defence or prosecution could throw something into the mix unchallenged at this stage.

That one is a dilemma for him I feel. If he admits to taking Libby into the park nearer to the river - misadventure becomes more probable than not. But so does murder.

If he doesn't misadventure becomes very difficult to believe but so does murder. If he wasn't such liar that is

So as the defence didn't raise it they are stuck with the option presented by the prosecution. Which I don't think could happen for the very reasons stated by the prosecutor including his prior and later behaviour

 

[Newthoughts]

Exactly this ... likely we will never know the sequence of events whatever the verdict...either way he is going to prison for a very long time


I agree I totally forgot its very unusual for there to be no Internet searches on death or water etc ...most cases even with very bright people show this

The river was there. Why would he need to research it?

 

[Steve2021]

We have no idea though if she could still wander around not screaming

True, I'm just saying the screaming occurred 12.15 earliest (SA), 12.30ish (Claremont residents) latest. PR drove off at 12.19 and says he left Libby outside the park. So she had to get way up the park to where the screaming occurred inside a maximum of 11 minutes ish.

 

[Lyall0814]

I suppose the only questions the jury should be asking imo is
Have prosecution proven so that they are sure he killed her by his own hands or putting her in or very near the river

Has it been proven that his version is not possible...any other scenarios are not allowed to be considered

I think maybe 'not possible' should be replaced by 'not likely'. Only the jury know how impressive - or not - he was when giving his evidence.

 

[porkypies]

Yes I realise that, but realistically we don’t know so he could have, but may not have- but for some reason he tells people (even before LS body is recovered) that she removed her underwear.

I wonder if the reason PR stated that LS walked off carrying her knickers, was in order to give credence to his earlier story that she took them off herself in the car, and threw them at him? In other words, PR is bolstering the idea that she initiated the sex, it was consensual, and since she walked off carrying her knickers, she could have later put them on again herself since the trial has been told she was found wearing them.

 

[Newthoughts]

True, I'm just saying the screaming occurred 12.15 earliest (SA), 12.30ish (Claremont residents) latest. PR drove off at 12.19 and says he left Libby outside the park. So she had to get way up the park to where the screaming occurred inside a maximum of 11 minutes ish.

Yep. That's my issue. At 12.15 PR says he's at the side of the road with Libby

So who screamed?

Why didn't he hear the scream.?

Why did Libby go into a dark park where she'd heard someone scream?

How did she get there so quickly.

Who was the man that wore similar trousers to PR.

Why wasn't Libby found in the middle of the parks

 

[Steve2021]

In answer to Elysian2, scenario 3...I'm pretty sure MrJitty explained this some way back, probably not on this thread but on the previous thread. Unless he pops up soon someone may be able to find it, or maybe it's searchable, I'm not sure. I feel sure he can answer it.

 

[Skigh]

Have checked the weather forecast for Sheffield tomorrow and it is good ,so should be no problems having a full day in court.

 

[Deckard]

I believe Libby's jacket was still in the rear of PR's car when he took her out of the vehicle. He guided her into the park after both doors were closed and the car alarm activated. Screams heard after 12:14am which gives him plenty of time to get closer to the river away from street lighting.

After Libby fought back and PR received facial injuries could he have pulled her black top above her head to stifle screams/pin her arms/blindfold. I believe the pressure he applied rendered her unconscious leaving no bruising as through clothing. Her head was covered making it impossible for him to know what condition she was in before hastily heading back to his car.

He returned two hours later, Libby dead through hypothermia. He puts her in the river. Black top more easily snagged in the river as now inverted and Libby with no watch on?

 

[JosieJo]

The river was there. Why would he need to research it?

As in tides , how long it takes a body to get to sea , water decomposition

 

[Zazie]

I know these are extreme cases but Ted Bundy and Dennis Radar started out with Voyeurism. PR has been doing this for at least 18 months. We do not know of anything prior but it could have started much sooner. I do not think it is unreasonable to think rape and murder were PR’s next steps. MOO

I agree - following this case has been educational in that respect. I used to think of voyeurism as being pathetic and passive (despite being a victim myself, years ago) but I now appreciate the violation involved - especially with PR's MO. The details from the Edgecumbe Street incident were chilling because he effectively enters the space of the house, having stuck his head through the top of the window and reached in to draw back the curtains while maintaining eye contact. I can understand why the poor woman was an emotional wreck, particularly as the police don't seem to have initially treated it seriously. It's pitiful to read how much this incident affected the trajectory of her life.
'Pawel Relowicz ruined my life after he watched me having sex'

Many moons ago on the thread someone posted a link to an academic article about the natural escalation from voyeurism > entering unoccupied houses > entering occupied houses > assault > murder. The stages are all about violating boundaries and social norms, to varying degrees. The link here isn't the same article, but so much of it recalls PR that I have no problem believing a 'peeping tom' (such a cute term!) could evolve into a rapist and murderer: The Predator Lurking Outside: The Dangerous Training Ground Where Many Prolific Serial Killers Get Their Start