I came late to tragic case of Libby and last weeks trial of PR. I spent much of yesterday reading through the 'live' court reports from Hull live to get a feel for the evidential material and the strength of the case against PR on each count.
Whilst I was relieved that PR was found guilty on both counts, if I had been on the jury I would have struggled with his guilt for the murder based on the lack of conclusive post mortem evidence reported. For me it was not shown beyond all reasonable doubt that PR's actions caused serious physical harm or death to Libby or that there was evidence of the intent to do so.
In terms of an appeal, I noted that the reported directions to the jury by the judge did not specify and explain the burden of proof required for conviction as being 'beyond all reasonable doubt'. It may be than an appeal against conviction for murder is based upon mis-direction by the judge in not making this requirement clear. I have no idea if such an omission would be sufficient for such an appeal.