GUILTY UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, found deceased, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #26

[Joolz1975]

This might help @Dotta

http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/PIB-Foreign national prisoners.pdf

Personally, it pains me that we now have to pay millions to keep him locked up here. I would much rather foreign nationals were allowed to serve sentences in their home countries (and ditto when Brits offend abroad).

I agree but only if the sentences dont get reduced once back in the home country.

 

[bos]

Things I'm pondering -

Presumably judge's remarks are carefully crafted because it will be those remarks used when the time comes for his release to determine his dangerousness. So fairly important.

In the defence's submissions they said "“The concealment: It is an aggravating feature, I can’t and don’t suggest otherwise but there is a live issue whether it was that that killed her. I repeat, it is an aggravating feature.”

It seems very unclear without knowing exactly how the jury decided on the murder, whether they might have thought he raped her and threw her in the river alive?

Does the judge not have to be more specific about that assault and specify that he asphyxiated Libby? I'm not sure how she can be certain what the jury decided?

It doesn't seem satisfactory to me that she would just remark "Having raped Liberty you assaulted her and put her body, dead or dying, into the tidal river. I have no doubt that your purpose in doing so was to conceal her body" and "I also accept that you may not have intended to kill Liberty but only cause her serious bodily injury."

I would think she needed to be more specific, but maybe she couldn't be? I suppose we will find out if there is an appeal.

MOO

This is like watching University Challenge,I don’t understand the question

 

[Tortoise]

This is like watching University Challenge,I don’t understand the question

 

[Dotta]

This might help @Dotta

http://www.prisonreformtrust.org.uk/Portals/0/Documents/PIB-Foreign national prisoners.pdf

Personally, it pains me that we now have to pay millions to keep him locked up here. I would much rather foreign nationals were allowed to serve sentences in their home countries (and ditto when Brits offend abroad).

Thanks. Im not learned in law matters - Its that I was really surprised that that man managed to sneak to Poland and have his sentence reduced. If he stayed in UK he would still be in prison. But it was many years ago and I still remember this case.

 

[Tortoise]

This is like watching University Challenge,I don’t understand the question

do you want me to try and explain it a different way?

 

[Cherwell]

He'll probably go to Frankland or Wakefield. You don't want to be there, he'll be rubbing shoulders with some really bad eggs.

I thought he was already in Wakefield. Wasn't it stamped on the letter to his wife?

 

[wilkela]

Things I'm pondering -

Presumably judge's remarks are carefully crafted because it will be those remarks used when the time comes for his release to determine his dangerousness. So fairly important.

In the defence's submissions they said "“The concealment: It is an aggravating feature, I can’t and don’t suggest otherwise but there is a live issue whether it was that that killed her. I repeat, it is an aggravating feature.”

It seems very unclear without knowing exactly how the jury decided on the murder, whether they might have thought he raped her and threw her in the river alive?

Does the judge not have to be more specific about that assault and specify that he asphyxiated Libby? I'm not sure how she can be certain what the jury decided?

It doesn't seem satisfactory to me that she would just remark "Having raped Liberty you assaulted her and put her body, dead or dying, into the tidal river. I have no doubt that your purpose in doing so was to conceal her body" and "I also accept that you may not have intended to kill Liberty but only cause her serious bodily injury."

I would think she needed to be more specific, but maybe she couldn't be? I suppose we will find out if there is an appeal.

MOO

I feel the same,I would like to know more details how they came to conclusion he done it, what actually make them be so convinced he throws her in the river?
I'm not arguing with the verdict I accept it but I would like to hear more details supporting this decision(just because I'm curious)

 

[Dotta]

I have a feeling this case isnt closed yet. Im sure PR will appeal - his defiant, insolent staring at Libby's parents mean that. After all, he managed to reduce his previous sentence as it was announced here to everybody's surprise.

 

[bos]

I’m worried if you do that my brain might still not process it & it’ll be a waste of your time.

As I understand it, the prosecution said don’t double count the aggravating factor of concealment for rape & murder.

The judge has said I’ll count it as an aggravating feature of the rape only because in the course of concealing that crime murder may have been committed(i.e Libby may either have been alive(including unconscious & presumed dead) or dead. She is saying that the murder wasn’t malice aforethought & could be consequence of crime a(rape) or concealment of crime a

EBM reply to @Tortoise

 

[C.greek]

I feel the same,I would like to know more details how they came to conclusion he done it, what actually make them be so convinced he throws her in the river?
I'm not arguing with the verdict I accept it but I would like to hear more details supporting this decision(just because I'm curious)

Simply that there was no other way for Libby to enter to river? Even The 7.5 min was enough according to the judge to rape her and put her in the river.jmo

 

[C.greek]

I’m worried if you do that my brain might still not process it & it’ll be a waste of your time.

As I understand it, the prosecution said don’t double count the aggravating factor of concealment for rape & murder.

The judge has said I’ll count it as an aggravating feature of the rape only because in the course of concealing that crime murder may have been committed(i.e Libby may either have been alive(including unconscious & presumed dead) or dead. She is saying that the murder wasn’t malice aforethought & could be consequence of crime a(rape) or concealment of crime a

EBM reply to @Tortoise

I think that is one of the reasons as well that the judge gave the jury the option of manslaughter. But the jury was convinced- because of the concealment of the body I'd imagine. Jmo

 

[wilkela]

Simply that there was no other way for Libby to enter to river? Even The 7.5 min was enough according to the judge to rape her and put her in the river.jmo

For me it wasn't simply
From my point view she could enter river on her own and witness heard screams after he left field
I just don't see it that simply and I guess judges too if they had to debate for 6 days(7?)

 

[C.greek]

For me it wasn't simply
From my point view she could enter river on her own

You are not on the jury though, we haven't heard the evidence they have, and we need to accept their verdict and the judge's sentencing when she talks about concealment of the body. They were convinced that PR put her in the river. Jmo

 

[Skigh]

For me it wasn't simply
From my point view she could enter river on her own and witness heard screams after he left field
I just don't see it that simply and I guess judges too if they had to debate for 6 days(7?)

I think the debating for 6 days shows how thoroughly they went through all the evidence before coming to a decision.

In my opinion ,PR will have no grounds for an appeal against either the verdict or sentence given.

 

[C.greek]

For me it wasn't simply
From my point view she could enter river on her own and witness heard screams after he left field
I just don't see it that simply and I guess judges too if they had to debate for 6 days(7?)

We don't know what they were debating and we don't even know if they were actually debating or being very careful to cover all grounds. I have faith in their verdict and the judge. I don't personally like that he might be out at the age of 53 but I do believe they were very careful. Jmo
ETA I am really glad they took the time they needed to examine carefully everything. This gives me more faith in their verdict

 

[Newthoughts]

Im asking because many years ago there was a case of another Pole in UK accused of rape. The victim fell unconscious, was in a coma and then disabled for life. There was a great scandal in Poland about this case. Well, the man was sentenced for many years. Then after some time in British jail he managed to return to Poland to carry on his sentence here. Not so long ago I saw his photo in Polish press and was shocked to learn that his British sentence was reduced considerably in Poland. He is now leading normal life. Got married, has children. I really dont understand how this works.

I hope that doesn't happen.

I don't think PR will ever lead a normal life. His crimes were escalating and I think a lot of women had a lucky escape because he was caught so quickly. Him staring at Libby's parents is really chilling. No remorse at all

I hope he serves his sentence here because this is where he committed his crime. He chose his fate - Libby didn't. Nobody forced him to rape and kill her.

However hard his sentence is, and it sounds like Wakefield will be hard, it won't remotely come close to the hell he's inflicted on Libby's family.

 

[Newthoughts]

I have a feeling this case isnt closed yet. Im sure PR will appeal - his defiant, insolent staring at Libby's parents mean that. After all, he managed to reduce his previous sentence as it was announced here to everybody's surprise.

Let's hope it's refused.

The jury deliberated for days, CPS were happy to go with a murder charge and he had a very fair trial.

He had every chance - Libby didn't

 

[Tortoise]

I’m worried if you do that my brain might still not process it & it’ll be a waste of your time.

As I understand it, the prosecution said don’t double count the aggravating factor of concealment for rape & murder.

The judge has said I’ll count it as an aggravating feature of the rape only because in the course of concealing that crime murder may have been committed(i.e Libby may either have been alive(including unconscious & presumed dead) or dead. She is saying that the murder wasn’t malice aforethought & could be consequence of crime a(rape) or concealment of crime a

EBM reply to @Tortoise

I'll try it another way.

For sentencing - his crimes -

Defence says - we don't know if Libby died as a result of him trying to conceal his crime by putting her in the river. So basically could have been thrown in alive.
Jury says - black box - we don't know what they found as fact
Judge says - he raped her and then assaulted her, possibly not intending to kill her, and put her in the river dead or dying.

I'm wondering if she has to be more specific about what he did, for sentencing purposes - can she be even, not knowing what the jury thought? If she is certain he assaulted her after raping her why not say specifically asphyxiated her - or can't she do that?

Maybe there's no difference in terms of recording his crime which is murder. But I'm wondering if not intending to kill her, or pushing her in the river to conceal the rape, or intending to kill her, could be argued as unclear in terms of how the sentence was structured at appeal.

So I wondered if the judge is entitled to put in her own assessment of the evidence, if she doesn't know how the jury decided. Not only in terms of calculation of sentence but for assessment of his offending at his parole hearing.

It may be that she gets it from the route to verdict - that the jury were directed to only return murder if they were satisfied he assaulted her in addition to the rape.

(clear as mud? )

 

[Dotta]

Let's hope it's refused.

The jury deliberated for days, CPS were happy to go with a murder charge and he had a very fair trial.

He had every chance - Libby didn't

I agree with you. Its just his staring at Libby's parents seems to mean, according to me, his declaration *Its not over*. But.... maybe Im fanciful? My imagination sometimes runs wild as Im often told.

 

[Cherwell]

I feel the same,I would like to know more details how they came to conclusion he done it, what actually make them be so convinced he throws her in the river?
I'm not arguing with the verdict I accept it but I would like to hear more details supporting this decision(just because I'm curious)

We'd all like to know, but in the UK jury proceedings are secret. The jurors are never allowed to talk about it or disclose any details about their decision or how it was arrived at.
It's different in the USA. Jurors there can talk about it all as soon as the trial is over, and some do.