VERDICT WATCH UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, found deceased, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #24

[Newthoughts]

Most witnesses also said she was shouting and screaming and became so aggressive that one of them had to leave her in the end.

I have said many times that I hold PR responsible for Libby coming to her death but how that happened is completely debatable using ALL of the information put before us.

And that doesn't preclude her going to the nearest house. It might impact on their response but it doesn't stop her heading there

Or just standing where she is screaming till someone comes out.

I cannot see her going into a dark place after what's happened.

 

[Steve2021]

... I'd say that neither prosecution nor defence has a strong case...

I'm not sure that's theoretically possible but with PRs lamentable display as a witness it does seem it is.

 

[Steve2021]

... I'd say that neither prosecution nor defence has a strong case...

I'm not sure that's theoretically possible but after PRs miserable display as a witness it does seem that it is.

 

[Cherwell]

I'm not sure that's theoretically possible but with PRs lamentable display as a witness it does seem it is.

That's exactly it.

 

[tigerowl]

And that doesn't preclude her going to the nearest house. It might impact on their response but it doesn't stop her heading there

Or just standing where she is screaming till someone comes out.

I cannot see her going into a dark place after what's happened.

Could you see her choosing not to enter her own home even when she's standing at the front door?
Could you see her willingly entering the house of people she didn't know?
Could you see her refusing their help and choosing to to hit the cold, snowy streets instead?
Could you see her wondering around on her own, dipping into the darkness of the nunnery?
Could you see her laying down in the snow when there is a bench to sit on literally right beside her?
Could you see her shouting and screaming and getting aggressive at people in the street trying to help her?
Could you see her getting into a car with a man she didn't know (he might have pressurised her, but he didn't pick her up off the street and carry her. She got in)?

 

[Newthoughts]

The debate between @Mommysleuth11 and @Newthoughts to me raises an interesting legal point. As the overriding task is to determine guilt beyond reasonable doubt i imagine as a matter of law the interpretation of the former is correct, that the jury can consider a scenario that would be favourable to the defendant even if it's pure speculation on their part, and not only has no evidence to support it been adduced but the evidence from the defendant specifically excludes for it. In practice however I suspect some will prefer to follow the logic of @Newthoughts


The problem with telling one lie after another is that at some point members of the jury may think to themselves, I wasn't born yesterday, not only I don't believe you but if you're telling me one thing the truth is bound to be other.

Can the jury consider a scenario favourable to the defendant that the defence hasn't put before them tho?

Wouldn't that leave the system open to all sorts of abuse because you could then imagine any scenario within the park that PR hadn't thought of and neither has his defence?

Surely doubt has to be reasonable and bound by what you've been told?

So my doubts about PRs story are partly based on me seriously believing that Libby would struggle to get into that river in her state from outside the park. Given everything we know.

I could imagine PR taking her into the park and that is favourable to him IMO. It alleviates my doubts.

But that hasn't been given to me as an option so why should I make it up?

 

[Newthoughts]

Could you see her choosing not to enter her own home even when she's standing at the front door?
Could you see her willingly entering the house of people she didn't know?
Could you see her refusing their help and choosing to to hit the cold, snowy streets instead?
Could you see her wondering around on her own, dipping into the darkness of the nunnery?
Could you see her laying down in the snow when there is a bench to sit on literally right beside her?
Could you see her shouting and screaming and getting aggressive at people in the street trying to help her?
Could you see her getting into a car with a man she didn't know (he might have pressurised her, but he didn't pick her up off the street and carry her. She got in)?

Well yes because we have witness statements and CCTV. What point are you making?

 

[tigerowl]

Well yes because we have witness statements and CCTV. What point are you making?

I'm wondering why, if you could see all that irrational behaviour, you can't see it as a possibility that she would go into the park.

 

[Steve2021]

I'm really hoping Libby's family were informed at the outset by the prosecution that they would set out the facts before the jury, but that's about all they could do, PR would obviously deny everything and the jury would have to make of it what they will. I'm hoping they went into the terrible ordeal of the trial with the belief a guilty murder verdict would be a bonus and if they don't get one it won't be so bitter a blow.

 

[Mommysleuth11]

The debate between @Mommysleuth11 and @Newthoughts to me raises an interesting legal point. As the overriding task is to determine guilt beyond reasonable doubt i imagine as a matter of law the interpretation of the former is correct, that the jury can consider a scenario that would be favourable to the defendant even if it's pure speculation on their part, and not only has no evidence to support it been adduced but the evidence from the defendant specifically excludes for it. In practice however I suspect some will prefer to follow the logic of @Newthoughts


The problem with telling one lie after another is that at some point members of the jury may think to themselves, I wasn't born yesterday, not only I don't believe you but if you're telling me one thing the truth is bound to be other.

If it wasn't for my doubt on the timescales anyway, I wouldn't dismiss his story (lies) as simply unhelpful to drawing conclusions but would absolutely draw inference from them as to his guilt.

I struggle to see how he has managed to do all that was needed in such a short time window and his later visit for me doesn't add anything in that he would have needed to run all the way to the bank and back to even have around a minute there, again thats not for me a reasonable timescale to achieve very much and would rely on him running all the way there and back which would limit his physical ability anyway.
Also the lack of forensic evidence of cause if death doesn't give any clues as to what happened in that time, she may have been asphyxiation, may have drowned may have succumbed to hypothermia.
I just think its impossible to find one set if circumstances more favourable than any other. I don't know what happened, I would have to guess massively and fill in too many gaps of information I just don't have.
I don't know if its my brains very black and white thinking but I can't find a scenario that fits except he possibly raped her in the park and left her to stumble off and she accidentally went into the river. Anything else would be pure guesswork and wild speculation on my part as I don't feel the prosecution have shown anything that PROVES otherwise.

I really wanted him to be guilty and before the trial began I would have bet my life on it.

 

[porkypies]

I think the lack of screaming or the prospect of it being a fox even could suggest he did murder and dispose of Libby in the water. Without the screams and the timing I’d have him down for rape and murder. Food for thought......

I quite agree, without the witnesses statements and the absolute attribution of the screams to LS, and the assumption that she must have been screaming in the park at all, I think the manslaughter idea would have been less likely.

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

Daily Courtroom List for Monday 08 February 2021
FINAL 1

THE LAW COURTS WEST BAR SHEFFIELD

Court 1 - sitting at 10:30 am

THE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE LAMBERT




Trial (Part Heard)
T20207204 RELOWICZ Pawel P 16XP1092119 HOLDM Crown Prosecution Service
*ALLOCATED TO TRIAL TRACK 2* DEFENDANT TO BE PRODUCED

 

[Newthoughts]

I'm wondering why, if you could see all that irrational behaviour, you can't see it as a possibility that she would go into the park.

Because she has to negotiate into the park. It's into the dark. She then has to make her way to the river. She's scared of the dark.

She's already fallen over several times.

Now I know many are of the opinion that her condition hasn't changed since being dropped off and can therefore walk it. But I think she will have been affected by hypothermia.

Based on the expert witness and my own admittedly limited knowledge of biology - I don't think she's capable of that journey. Either thru gateway to start with, thru the weeds, up the bank and so on.

I think she'd be falling over far more. I she'd be getting too tired to get up. I think eventually she would have died in the park. In terms of area there is a lot more park than river for her to fall in. @bos put it earlier like a marathon runner hitting a wall.

Yet no signs of that. No snagged clothes on brambles. No lost shoes

Your knowledge of biology may lead you to a different conclusion that's fine.

And also considering all the evidence I think it very reasonable to assume PR would think similar and get his sex story in earlier. Which he doesn't.

I assume you will automatically disagree so I'll leave you to ask the others why they don't think she'd go in the park.

You must therefore find him not guilty

 

[mrjitty]

I'm not sure what you mean by adverse inference though.

Do you mean evidence of sex should be withheld from him, so that he goes blind into court to give his version? Or he is prevented from changing his version?

Because as far as I know he is cautioned "it may harm your defence if you fail to mention.." and it does harm his defence, going into court and expecting the jury to believe him if his stated reason for giving a no comment interview makes no sense to them.

So i am more spitballing game theory - but ordinarily his "no comment" cannot attract adverse comment from the Judge or counsel (right to silence)

But this would seem like a case where the Judge could make a specific adverse direction to the Jury that PR can't now claim a convenient location for consensual sex - just as a potential example

Otherwise it becomes to easy too retrofit facts that the accused knows about once the entire prosecution case is revealed

As far as blind reveal goes - I would actually favour this version for Evidence in Chief, so the accused can't listen to all the other witnesses and tailor his evidence

 

[JosieJo]

A 14 stone fit young man - nope.

Although a young man could carry a struggling woman ..or drag ...it absolutely would slow him down ...its impossible it would not hamper

Regards the 7.5 min if they stayed outside the park...I truly do not see the time itself as a problem...if the car had been there half an hour or more I'd worry ...but 7.5 min when he claims the went for a pee before any contact then after she was sick and there was a "row" ..he didn't give time frames or were there gaps in between these events..its not as if there is a gap of an hour to fill?

 

[Ruthbullock]

IMHO, standing on Oak Road where the car was parked I am not sure Libby would have been able to see how brightly illuminated the park was. In looking at google maps I see there is a lot of foliage that would obstruct her view. Not to mention she was impaired. PR visited earlier so he may have known what the park looked like. I would attached google maps but I think we have all seen the area where PR and CCTV shows he parked a million times. MOO

I don’t think that would particularly have mattered- her choices seemed to be run through an open pedestrian gate into the playing fields, run down the back alley of a load of houses (no better in my opinion), or run down a road which didn’t appear to have anything either side and potentially opened LS up to being followed by car

 

[Newthoughts]

Although a young man could carry a struggling woman ..or drag ...it absolutely would slow him down ...its impossible it would not hamper

Regards the 7.5 min if they stayed outside the park...I truly do not see the time itself as a problem...if the car had been there half an hour or more I'd worry ...but 7.5 min when he claims the went for a pee before any contact then after she was sick and there was a "row" ..he didn't give time frames or were there gaps in between these events..its not as if there is a gap of an hour to fill?

Regarding your first point. I've seen lads pick up their girlfriends and carry them. He'd 14 stone and he's 24 and most telling of all his defence did not dwell on it which I assumed they would. Locals are divided

But you think 7.5 minutes is fine in silent outside the park go for it.

 

[Catsarse]

RSBM-Is it a bit weird that my only thoughts were how surprised I was that he indicated when turning back onto Beverley Road towards Haworth pub? Like he still did all the right things driving wise. I don’t know why I think he wouldn’t

I thought that too, drives very normally. I watched that a bit stumped tbh!

Most witnesses also said she was shouting and screaming and became so aggressive that one of them had to leave her in the end.

I have said many times that I hold PR responsible for Libby coming to her death but how that happened is completely debatable using ALL of the information put before us.

And that doesn't preclude her going to the nearest house. It might impact on their response but it doesn't stop her heading there

Or just standing where she is screaming till someone comes out.

I cannot see her going into a dark place after what's happened.

Remember it may not be that she was raped near immediately after them leaving the car though. It may have been 2/3 mins in after being frogmarched to the park (just as an example). There’s a lot of discussions and debates which is great but the timeline might not be as clear cut as •parks car
•rape
•runs into (or doesn’t) the park/playing fields

They may have parked and he’s tried it on on the car, she gets out and starts walking. Does he catch up, even apologising walking her into the orpf passing the bench. Then assaults her? Who knows....I’m just making this up but it could be a plausible theory.
Sadly these are just theories that we are all throwing out there

I’ll be honest if I was a juror I’d definitely be caught up on the time differences of the ‘screams’ and that some were heard after PR had left oak road. I wouldn’t be able to live with myself if I didn’t weigh up both sides.
These also may be people who have never heard of/heard little of this case. If I was in those camps I’d definitely have to consider all evidence, PR being a liar and sexual deviant aside, to make such a huge choice in guilty or not guilty.

 

[Newthoughts]

I don’t think that would particularly have mattered- her choices seemed to be run through an open pedestrian gate into the playing fields, run down the back alley of a load of houses (no better in my opinion), or run down a road which didn’t appear to have anything either side and potentially opened LS up to being followed by car

Run?
Vulnerable Libby would have 'struggled to defend herself' - trial

 

[JosieJo]

Her going into the park herself as a theory did stump me ..its not rationale...but that night she was far from rationale and although unlikely is not impossible
Although there are lamps in oak rd there are no houses ...where they were parked it would have just seemed like a rural track in the dark with some glow from the rear of some houses but at standing level would have been blocked by trees / fence...its not quite the same as being in a well lit street of houses and stepping into an abyss.
Imo its impossible to know her thought process ...how can we even try to imagine?