Newthoughts
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2019
- Messages
- 2,158
- Reaction score
- 14,055
I did think of that but:“he drove along and she started to undress herself and started taking off her pants“
is what one of PR’s friends said he told him - from that, it can’t definitively be said that she hadn’t taken anything else off before the pants.
As nobody was there to obtain Libby’s core temperature, I don’t think anyone can definitively say to what degree hypothermia was present.
I think she'd have started with her jacket. Or easier things. Undressing occurs at the final stages of hypothermia as people 'paradoxically' try to cool down.
I think therefore she'd be starting with her jacket or top. I don't think she'd really be aware of clothing she couldn't see. Nor would she be making sexual advances.
He says somewhere that she takes them with her. By paradoxical undressing she'd be trying to burrow into something not picking up her pants and walking off
I think the comment about pants is specifically to explain their absence. I guess that's all he removed
I think it's very difficult to remove your pants in the front seat of a moving car whilst drunk. I've tried to get changed in a stationary car whilst sober and it's very difficult. We're sure she was only ever in the front seat of his car
I don't think she was near that final stages as she was upset enough to scream.
Plus no obvious typical signs of dying of hypothermia were found post mortem. By the time of paradoxical undressing I think brain centres are certainly shutting down hence the loss of awareness of temp. I think that would be a sign post mortem.
But I do agree about grains of truth in testimony. In this case it was her wanting to go home to her mum. Just doesn't seem like something PR would invent. And it ties in with what we now know but he didn't then