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

[Financejane]

Hello. I’ve been following this case since the start as have many of you but have never got round to signing up to comment. I’ve read all threads and your contributions are all amazing. Such dedication to try and find the truth or as close to it as possible.

Anyway the reason I’ve posted is because I live about two miles away from where PR lived. Last night for the first time in I don’t know how long, my husband and I were awoken by screaming. I instantly panicked, then my husband said don’t worry it’s foxes. I first heard foxes a few years ago and was amazed how much they sounded like screams of female adults.

It’s that irregular for us to hear them, my husband asked this morning if I remembered hearing them (he knows nothing about the LS case).

This evening I was working at the back of my house and heard screaming again. So I decided to time it. The noise sounded like a human, was on and off in shortish bursts of 3-4 seconds for 6 minutes and stopped suddenly. I presume it’s mating time.

FWIW, I don’t like the idea of PR being back on the streets ever, however I’m on the side of the fence where I don’t think there is enough evidence for a murder verdict. I think I’d be persuaded manslaughter though.

I also read the secret barrister recently and it completely changed my view of the defence system and how important a good defence is for everyone. Because many innocent people have found themselves in court just by virtue of wrong place, wrong time amongst other things. Not suggesting that’s the case for PR of course!

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

Ah, good point. I can’t quite remember what they said in court about the watch, I remember it being passed along the jury to see the clasp mechanism was intact.

Yes, likewise. I don't think it was said, although had there been no doubt it would have been mentioned.

 

[ChiCubs2016]

I think he is fiddling with a condom, which he removes from his pocket before sitting down and then replaces as the other car drives away.

This is exactly what I thought. It looks to me like he is putting on a condom.
This video is much clearer than any I have seen.
I also think Libby was pushing him away. I am not sure he was tugging at her but I definitely think he was trying to persuade her and he was one-arm pushing him away like “get out of here, leave me alone.”

 

[Edinlass]

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......

 

[Steve2021]

I think Mr Wright the prosecution QC referred to PR biding his time. Having just rewatched the video of PR sitting with the car door open I can't think there's a better phrase to explain what he's doing. I think he's recognised his golden opportunity to get hold of Libby and have "easy sex". He's sitting there possibly nervously fiddling with something, while he thinks through how he's going to do it and asks himself is it really going to work, am I going to get away with it, am I really going to go for it rather than just have a night of my normal sex offending. And then whoosh, I'm gonna do it...he's on his feet and he's off.

I'm not saying he necessarily planned at that moment to kill Libby but I'm pretty convinced the rape was premeditated.


He's fiddling with something as he's nervous as he's aware he's taking a huge risk and there will be seriously big repercussions if it doesn't work out to plan. He knows as to his offending what he's intending to do is on another level.

 

[Winterbells]

Am I right in thinking he’s sitting in his car waiting for the Romanians to stop pestering Libby? We see a car drive off (theirs?)) and he’s immediately up and off back to retrieve Libby.

 

[Steve2021]

With reference to @Edinlass I'm now wondering if sufficient consideration to it being foxes was given.

With reference to @Financejane the difficulty as I see it with manslaughter is that whilst many of us feel PR deserves it, it isn't a consolation prize the prosecution automatically get when they can't prove murder. Manslaughter has to be proved, and beyond reasonable doubt, and as I understand it the jury will have to be satisfied Libby's death occured due to a criminal act which a reasonable person would realise must have subjected her to the risk of some physical harm.

I hate to say it but I'm not at all sure there's any more scope for a manslaughter verdict than a murder. I wonder that's why the judge was reported as having said it had just occurred to her to mention it. Maybe she had been thinking it wasn't a runner but changed her mind over lunch, maybe she's still not too sure about it. Hard to say.

Quite how she's explained the legal nuances to the jury we really don't know, but I'd say it's less obvious than we all tend to assume so she'd have needed to be nice and clear.

Manslaughter explained – Sentencing.

 

[Marulinka]

Hello. I’ve been following this case since the start as have many of you but have never got round to signing up to comment. I’ve read all threads and you contributions are all amazing. Such dedication to try and find the truth or as close to it as possible.

Anyway the reason I’ve posted is because I live about two miles away from where PR lived. Last night for the first time in I don’t know how long, my husband and I were awoken by screaming. I instantly panicked, then my husband said don’t worry it’s foxes. I first heard foxes a few years ago and was amazed how much they sounded like screams of female adults.

It’s that irregular for us to hear them, my husband asked this morning if I remembered hearing them (he knows nothing about the LS case).

This evening I was working at the back of my house and heard screaming again. So I decided to time it. The noise sounded like a human, was on and off in shortish bursts of 3-4 seconds for 6 minutes and stopped suddenly. I presume it’s mating time.

FWIW, I don’t like the idea of PR being back on the streets ever, however I’m on the side of the fence where I don’t think there is enough evidence for a murder verdict. I think I’d be persuaded manslaughter though.

I also read the secret barrister recently and it completely changed my view of the defence system and how important a good defence is for everyone. Because many innocent people have found themselves in court just by virtue of wrong place, wrong time amongst other things. Not suggesting that’s the case for PR of course!

I have foxes living in backgarden and they do make loads of screaming noise. Many a time did i get woken up by them. But it never occured to me to time those screams! Well done. Thanks to your insight I am for the first time prepared to acknowledge the possibility of the screams heard by the witnesses actually being foxes!

Lets just for a moment presume that those were all fox screams that night. In such a case both the conflicting witness testimonies could have been correct! Witness 1 hears fox screams around 00:14 checks phone for time, looks from window, few minutes later by strike of luck sees a man exiting a park swiftly...goes back to sleep.
Meanwhile unrelated witness gets woken up by another fox scream, checks phone for time 00:30....I know I am not re-enacring the scenes accurately but just as an example and of course MOO.

If all above actually happened that way and there was no real human screaming happening that night, we still have a credible witness who seen a man walking away from the inside of the park with ugency!
And as far as we know, the man matches PR description and the sighting occures roughly moments before PR was recorded on CCTV driving away from where he was parked.

What do you think about this scenario?

Edited spelling*

 

[Newthoughts]

To add on to this, it was used because there was evidence that she still did have resenents of her previous health issues. There were numerous parts in the defence closing which suggested we hadn’t heard all the evidence on this during the trail updates.

I can fully understand why people were unhappy to hear it, but if there is evidence to support another outcome then it’s the defence job to explore it, whether we believe it or not

I would be happy to hear it if were relevant - but she'd been discharged over two years before! she doesn't appear to have been on the uni's radar. She showed no signs of being suicidal on Beverley road when several buses and cars were driving past! How easy to step into the road

If it was considered relevant to delve into mental health then perhaps it should be done by an expert rather than a defence lawyer! Who could put it n context

I would imagine there was equally relevant stuff from those dealing with PR which we didn't hear. Posters on here have mentioned people hat had dealt with him who offered insights but nothing about him.

 

[Newthoughts]

Where was this stated? I don’t remember this, I could have missed it to be fair! But don’t remember it in any of the updates.

I’ve never seen any trial in the UK where the defence were allowed to refuse psych assessments of the suspect...

Unless the defence is diminished responsibility due to mental illness than no - we don't hear their psych reports. I guess thatt would only ever really work for things like serious psychosis where he believed Libby posed a threat or something.

Bit we don't hear, for example, if they show psychopathic traits, because they don't lead to diminished responsibility - psychopaths know full well what they're was doing.

That will probably come after the trial before sentencing - when it's too late

 

[Newthoughts]

Good post! And I think it sums up how I feel - conflicted! Going exclusively from the evidence there is not enough to convince me personally that PR is guilty of murder beyond all reasonable doubt. And as you say the charge of manslaughter still creates the same difficulties. And yet I voted manslaughter on the Websleuths vote. I guess it's because I feel, as many others do, that PR needs to pay for what happened to Libby because if he had not taken her to the park none of this would have happened. But in reality I still can't say I have no reasonable doubts. What I would say is I won't shed any tears if the Jury find him guilty.

What are your doubts? Genuine question. If it's the screams then you have the problem of only one set being heard. So you have to look at everything else. And draw inferences from the wording of experts.

 

[Newthoughts]

Diminished responsibility is according to me in "crime of passion" - eg a jealous husband kills a wife in a rage - it is not premeditated. Or a defendant is mentally ill and doesn't distinguish between right and wrong. In such a case he is sent to psychiatric Institution instead of prison.

I always thought in law diminished responsibility meant not knowing what you're doing for some reason. For example someone suffering from paranoid schizophrenia thinking that the perfectly innocent stranger next to them is an assassin or spy who is going to kill them - plunges a knife into them as defence.

Not knowing right from wrong isn't a defence. Psychopaths know what they're doing. They know right from wrong. They make choices.

We really don't know if PR has psychopathic traits at all because his relevant mental health is protected. But lack of empathy one of the traits. He certainly showed that.

Pre meditation was shown the minute he put Libby in his car instead of attacking her in the heat of the moment where he first encountered her. Unlike the jealous rage example.

 

[Newthoughts]

I thought he could have a phone in his hand at one stage, but didn't see him put it anywhere when he got up. He was definitely 'fiddling' with something.

I think that was a general consensus much

It's not Libby's watch he fiddling with is it?
Did it fall off when they were interacting near the bus stop I wonder?
There's a tiny reflection of light that bounces off whatever he's holding at around -6.10

Ah now I assumed it had fallen off when she was getting in the car but it was unbroken. But that would be a way to con her.

 

[Newthoughts]

Ah, good point. I can’t quite remember what they said in court about the watch, I remember it being passed along the jury to see the clasp mechanism was intact.

Clasp unbroken but they were looking at how it fastened. If it's the sort of clasp that I'm thinking of it it would come undone if someone was gripping her wrist

Trace DNA found for Libby - obviously has she'd been wearing it - the woman that found it and the policeman that receuved it. Handling by the woman and policeman would probably have removed any other trace DNA

 

[Catsarse]

I used to work with the blog's author. She's often around Hull's parks early in the day. Those last couple of photos around Stoneferry give a good impression of the appearance of the river between the playing fields and the city centre.

It’s a lovely blog, now saved to see more of our lovely East Yorkshire wildlife! Great pics of the river too for people not local to the area.

Yes, likewise. I don't think it was said, although had there been no doubt it would have been mentioned.

I think the dna found on it was the lady who found it (I believe she handed it in a month after Libby went missing) and libbys dna. From what I remember of the court case, PR dna wasn’t on the watch but of course happy to be corrected!

I’d said about the screams in the earlier thread, just a ‘what if’ on if they were foxes, just to play devils advocate? PR still has to say she screamed to fit in with the witness accounts somewhat, but imagine she didn’t scream and his hands were tied? He can’t say no she didn’t scream because I’d rendered her unconscious can he!

All just to play devils advocate. MOO etc it’s difficult because the timings given were different and don’t tie in with him being there for the last two witnesses. Regardless of my personal thoughts I can’t discount that.

 

[Newthoughts]

With reference to @Edinlass I'm now wondering if sufficient consideration to it being foxes was given.

With reference to @Financejane the difficulty as I see it with manslaughter is that whilst many of us feel PR deserves it, it isn't a consolation prize the prosecution automatically get when they can't prove murder. Manslaughter has to be proved, and beyond reasonable doubt, and as I understand it the jury will have to be satisfied Libby's death occured due to a criminal act which a reasonable person would realise must have subjected her to the risk of some physical harm.

I hate to say it but I'm not at all sure there's any more scope for a manslaughter verdict than a murder. I wonder that's why the judge was reported as having said it had just occurred to her to mention it. Maybe she had been thinking it wasn't a runner but changed her mind over lunch, maybe she's still not too sure about it. Hard to say.

Quite how she's explained the legal nuances to the jury we really don't know, but I'd say it's less obvious than we all tend to assume so she'd have needed to be nice and clear.

Manslaughter explained – Sentencing.

I don't think so either. I also think if you can't find murder you can't find manslaughter either. I think people are seeing if as a cop out rather than a crime in its own right.

 

[Newthoughts]

I have foxes living in backgarden and they do make loads of screaming noise. Many a time did i get woken up by them. But it never occured to me to time those screams! Well done. Thanks to your insight I am for the first time prepared to acknowledge the possibility of the screams heard by the witnesses actually being foxes!

Lets just for a moment presume that those were all fox screams that night. In such a case both the conflicting witness testimonies could have been correct! Witness 1 hears fox screams around 00:14 checks phone for time, looks from window, few minutes later by strike of luck sees a man exiting a park swiftly...goes back to sleep.
Meanwhile unrelated witness gets woken up by another fox scream, checks phone for time 00:30....I know I am not re-enacring the scenes accurately but just as an example and of course MOO.

If all above actually happened that way and there was no real human screaming happening that night, we still have a credible witness who seen a man walking away from the inside of the park with ugency!
And as far as we know, the man matches PR description and the sighting occures roughly moments before PR was recorded on CCTV driving away from where he was parked.

What do you think about this scenario?

Edited spelling*

In my opinion the most important part of that evidence is the man seen walking. Too many coincidences not to be PR. The timing, location, trousers.

And even with that there is a whole evenings worth of evidence to consider alongside it. Starting with his first trip to the park

 

[Niner]

Friday, February 5th:
*Trial continues (Day 15)-VERDICT WATCH! (Day 2) (@ 10:30am UK) – UK – Liberty “Libby” Anna Squire (21) (last seen Jan. 31, 2019 outside Welly Club in Hull; found Mar. 20, 2019 from Grimsby Docks in the Humber Estuary) - *Pawel P. Relowicz (24/now 25) arrested (Feb. 6, 2019 on suspicion of abduction) officially charged (Oct. 30, 2019) with murder & rape. No plea entered yet. Not guilty plea entered on Jan. 12, 2021.
Trial began on Jan. 12, 2021. Trial will be in Sheffield. Richard Wright QC will lead, Mr. Woolfall prosecutor. Oliver Saxby QC for defense. Trial expected to last 6 weeks. Jury: 5 men & 7 women. Day 1 (4/2/21) of deliberations: 2 hours.
Was originally charged (18/3/19 & 10/5/19) with 5 counts of burglary, 4 counts of voyeurism, 3 counts of outraging public decency & 1 count of receiving stolen goods. On Aug. 12, 2019 plead guilty to 9 charges including voyeurism (4 counts), outraging public decency (2 counts) & burglary (3 counts). Relowicz jailed for 8½ years.
Trial Day 1-13 (12/1/21 - 3/2/21) reference post #704 here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Feb. 4th Thursday Day 14: Relowicz is back in the dock & the jury is in. Justice Lambert is returning to her summing up which she began on Wednesday.
Judge recaps the evidence of screams her at Oak Road-Justice Lambert is reminding the jury of the evidence of SA who lived near the playing fields. (#749); Justice Lambert told the jury: “You don’t have to accept it [expert evidence] but keep in mind neither side is disputing the evidence but it’s the weight you put on that is a matter for you." Cause of death not determined-Justice Lambert has turned to the evidence on pathologist Dr. Matthew Lyall. (#755); Justice Lambert is going over the evidence of Professor Charles Deakin is a consultant in intensive care, who shed light on Libby’s condition on the night she disappeared. (#759) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
What Relowicz did after meeting Libby-Justice Lambert recalled what Relowicz did after meeting Libby. (#762) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Justice Lambert has recapped the police interviews which provide differing accounts to the one he has provided in court. Justice Lambert says Relowicz lived in Hull for eight years & moved over here to live with his sister in Hull but she eventually moved away. He had a wife & two children & worked as a butcher. Justice Lambert is going through Relwoicz's previous convictions. What Relowicz said in the witness box-Justice Lambert said Relowicz “admitted in evidence he had told a number of lies during his interviews because he didn’t want his wife to know he had been doing the sorts of things he had been & that was why he had lied”. She has reminded the jury of Relowicz’s cross examination & says he denied raping & killing Libby. She says: “He said he left her alive & well at the bottom of Beresford Avenue shouting at him.” (#837) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
What the jury has to consider-Justice Lambert has told the jury what it has to consider when coming to a verdict on rape and murder. (#842) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
There is now a lunch break after which Justice Lambert will give the jury final directions before retiring to consider its verdict. Back from lunch...
Manslaughter verdict an option-Justice Lambert has told the jury it has occurred to her manslaughter is an option for the verdict but it has not been explained. She said: “There is no count of manslaughter on the indictment but it can be returned as an alternative verdict to murder. "That would arise if you were sure Relowicz assaulted Libby & it caused her death in the sense it made one or more contributions to her death & whether he intended it to. If the answer is no, the verdict will be not guilty of murder but you should consider whether that person intended to cause some harm & then if you are sure of that you will return a guilty verdict of manslaughter." (#909) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
The jury is now being sworn out & members will now consider their verdict; started at about 2:45pm UK time & ended deliberations at 4:45pm UK time. Back tomorrow, 5/2/21 at 10:30am.

 

[mrjitty]

@mrjitty. I was wondering what you made of Mr Saxby's closing speech. He seemed to spend a lot of time on possible suicide and very little on much else. I didn't think I'd be very happy if I'd been PR.

I think he did the sensible thing - hint that it was a rape, creating a context for suicide on the murder charge.

The evidence of rape is overwhelming IMO, so by hinting that the defence might accept that, he kind of creates a logic in a wink wink type of way

Of course this makes no real sense because then it means his client straight up lied to the jury - which is what the defence also alluded to

My problem with these kind of defences "oh my client is actually lying but that doesn't make hm guilty" is it requires us to interpret the lies in the best possible light, but why should we do that? This isn't really how we handle witness evidence.

The best pathway would have been for the accused not to have testified, and then for counsel to have speculated in this way. I am not sure how well it works given PRs absurd story.

 

[mrjitty]

In my opinion the most important part of that evidence is the man seen walking. Too many coincidences not to be PR. The timing, location, trousers.

This is my top line belief as well.

But @Tortoise 's reverse timeline gives me some pause. But as we don't have access to the detailed evidence, I can't really reach any proper conclusions.