Found Deceased UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #15 *ARREST*

[Miss_French]

I have followed this case from the beginning, but every time I check in, I am more confused than before.
So the cab driver was arrested, but he was not charged yet with the assault? Or is he not the perp?

I have no idea anymore...sigh

The man specified as being a taxi driver is a witness and not involved. He picked up Libby from the club and dropped her at her house, where she was seen by 2 other students who were heading on a night out. Libby walked away from them all, and her house, and was reported to have last been seen sitting on the bench on Beverly Road; it is in this area that she was reported to have been helped by a man with grey hair and beard who got out of his car; again, he is only a witness and not involved.

There is no report of how Libby left the bench, but there is speculation on here that PR, who was arrested on suspicion of abduction of Libby but not charged, used the ruse of being a taxi driver to get Libby into his car; I repeat, just speculation.

Hope this helps.

 

[Miss_French]

If it were me, and based on totally unscientific anecdotes, I'd go to bus stops, train stations or - and this would be very near - closer to the actual halls of residence. They're not that far away.

So, you'd choose areas likely to have more footfall, passing vehicles, waiting taxis, cctv and maybe security staff?
Sorry, but I think your flashing career would be pretty short (no pun intended).

If you're out and about generally it's not difficult to see where students are heading too/from, maybe the local papers have letting ads, and you could legitimately drive round, park up and have a pretend phone conversation whilst casing the joints in areas that are less secure and less surveilled.

 

[EricaAmbrose1]

Is it possible after LE having looked at many other local CCTVs possibly since Libby disappeared . Eventually LE have perhaps found evidence of LS in PR's car perhaps en route from Haworth if PR did have LS in his car.Could the maybe later CCTV possibly ave shown evidence of LS appearing to look visibly distressed and therefore is it possible that's why the LE change the word of possible abduction of LS to kidnapping? I'm speculating wildly as cctv is not usually very clear and it's a very upsetting thought.

 

[HongKongPhooey]

So, you'd choose areas likely to have more footfall, passing vehicles, waiting taxis, cctv and maybe security staff?
Sorry, but I think your flashing career would be pretty short (no pun intended).

If you're out and about generally it's not difficult to see where students are heading too/from, maybe the local papers have letting ads, and you could legitimately drive round, park up and have a pretend phone conversation whilst casing the joints in areas that are less secure and less surveilled.

As a student myself, whilst overseas I was "flashed" literally more times than I remember. God only knows what was wrong with that place! But, it usually happened in quiet residential streets or on a main road with shrubs etc. One man was in his driver's seat, parked up with his door open. One drove up and down, put it this way with only one hand on the wheel. IMO what they want is shock reaction, they don't usually want a crowd or risk of being chased by men etc. in case you're wondering, I was always with a friend and blatantly ignoring the pervs spoiled their fun.

 

[Redout]

... the first shot we get is just the car lights as it's unlocked. We get PR sitting smoking for a bit.

Is it now known or assumed that PR is the person in that video?

I have read many posts about this sad event but I am confused.

I thought that it is obviously PR. I don't understand why it is taking so long.

He is charged with being a multiple sex offender in the vicinity.
He admits to offering her a lift.
He drives an Astra SXi and the spider video shows an Astra SXi. A car expert earlier in the many threads said that it is a XYZ type Astra SXi and the chances of their being two such cars in the vicinity are very low.
So for the above and other reasons, there is probably a video of him getting LS to get in his car (assuming the spider video is him, and the woman is LS).

Does (or rather did) PR smoke? Did he smoke roll ups? I think that less than 1 in 20 people smoke roll ups.

Does (did) he have pointy boots and tight pants? Many people have some tight pants but boots like those t I have only seen on boxers.

Anyway, is the reason PR is not being charged because
1) The LE (and general pinion) are sure that it is PR, but they want to make sure it sticks?
2) The LE want to get PR on premeditation, not simply opportunistic?
3) OR In spite of all the above, the LE are not sure its him?

Why isn't this open and shut?

Other than the time taken to charge and convict him, is there any reason for thinking it is not PR?

Why do people think there may be accomplice(s)?

 

[JosieJo]

Is it now known or assumed that PR is the person in that video?

I have read many posts about this sad event but I am confused.

I just feel they know he picked her up ..maybe even he admitted it ..but its possible he claimed he just dropped her off and they cant prove otherwise ..I think this is why they wanted the croda CCTV people to come forward in hope they saw something that disproves his version of events ...and maybe if the evidence is just that they may need him proved a sex offender in court
This is all just my thoughts though and could be completely wrong
I thought that it is obviously PR. I don't understand why it is taking so long.

He is charged with being a multiple sex offender in the vicinity.
He admits to offering her a lift.
He drives an Astra SXi and the spider video shows an Astra SXi. A car expert earlier in the many threads said that it is a XYZ type Astra SXi and the chances of their being two such cars in the vicinity are very low.
So for the above and other reasons, there is probably a video of him getting LS to get in his car (assuming the spider video is him, and the woman is LS).

Does (or rather did) PR smoke? Did he smoke roll ups? I think that less than 1 in 20 people smoke roll ups.

Does (did) he have pointy boots and tight pants? Many people have some tight pants but boots like those t I have only seen on boxers.

Anyway, is the reason PR is not being charged because
1) The LE (and general pinion) are sure that it is PR, but they want to make sure it sticks?
2) The LE want to get PR on premeditation, not simply opportunistic?
3) OR In spite of all the above, the LE are not sure its him?

Why isn't this open and shut?

Other than the time taken to charge and convict him, is there any reason for thinking it is not PR?

Why do people think there may be accomplice(s)?

 

[JosieJo]

I just feel they know he picked her up ..maybe even he admitted it ..but its possible he claimed he just dropped her off and they cant prove otherwise ..I think this is why they wanted the croda CCTV people to come forward in hope they saw something that disproves his version of events ...and maybe if the evidence is just that they may need him proved a sex offender in court
This is all just my thoughts though and could be completely wrong

 

[Newthoughts]

Is it now known or assumed that PR is the person in that video?

I have read many posts about this sad event but I am confused.

I thought that it is obviously PR. I don't understand why it is taking so long.

He is charged with being a multiple sex offender in the vicinity.
He admits to offering her a lift.
He drives an Astra SXi and the spider video shows an Astra SXi. A car expert earlier in the many threads said that it is a XYZ type Astra SXi and the chances of their being two such cars in the vicinity are very low.
So for the above and other reasons, there is probably a video of him getting LS to get in his car (assuming the spider video is him, and the woman is LS).

Does (or rather did) PR smoke? Did he smoke roll ups? I think that less than 1 in 20 people smoke roll ups.

Does (did) he have pointy boots and tight pants? Many people have some tight pants but boots like those t I have only seen on boxers.

Anyway, is the reason PR is not being charged because
1) The LE (and general pinion) are sure that it is PR, but they want to make sure it sticks?
2) The LE want to get PR on premeditation, not simply opportunistic?
3) OR In spite of all the above, the LE are not sure its him?

Why isn't this open and shut?

Other than the time taken to charge and convict him, is there any reason for thinking it is not PR?

Why do people think there may be accomplice(s)?

I personally think he has an accomplice for the reasons you've pointed out coupled with the fact he hasn't been charged yet. And additionally the people that saw PR in court who are very sure the person featured is PR - in terms of stance and gait. The media source used to show it is credible and it's clearly been edited to omit certain parts - which I'd guess is at the request of LE. So I'm pretty sure it is him.

Add to that the fact that footage could be used to initially arrest him but they would only have gotten extensions if they presented more evidence opening new lines of questioning. They clearly had enough to get the full 96 hours.

So I'd go with either your second point - they feel it was murder and are looking for premeditation. Which is time consuming.

Or he had an accomplice and that has complicated things in terms of where her body could have been placed in water compared with PRs known movements. Even when her body could have been placed in water.

And also looking at the location of previous crimes - he was very good at finding houses to peep into. Even moving away from the student area on boxing day when most students have gone home. How was he so lucky.

 

[Newthoughts]

I just feel they know he picked her up ..maybe even he admitted it ..but its possible he claimed he just dropped her off and they cant prove otherwise ..I think this is why they wanted the croda CCTV people to come forward in hope they saw something that disproves his version of events ...and maybe if the evidence is just that they may need him proved a sex offender in court
This is all just my thoughts though and could be completely wrong

But all murderers would lie about what happened to their victims. It doesn't stop them being charged. Nobody would be charged if that were the case.

 

[JosieJo]

But all murderers would lie about what happened to their victims. It doesn't stop them being charged. Nobody would be charged if that were the case.

But they have to prove he lied which is where they may have had a degree of difficulty..they wont charge till they can show he didn't just drop her off as he would claim ...in this scenario obviously

 

[HongKongPhooey]

He did say he had given her a lift home according to msm news reports quoting his sister. Links will be in first thread. If he has stuck to this story, however unlikely, it places Libby in his car.

 

[Newthoughts]

He did say he had given her a lift home according to msm news reports quoting his sister. Links will be in first thread. If he has stuck to this story, however unlikely, it places Libby in his car.

Not only that - it places Libby in the car of an alleged sex offender about to attend court with 90 witnesses and CCTV.

But they have to prove he lied which is where they may have had a degree of difficulty..they wont charge till they can show he didn't just drop her off as he would claim ...in this scenario obviously

But without any alibi that would come down to an alleged sex offender claiming to have dropped off a very vulnerable young woman somewhere. Nobody sees her again and then she is found dead. Is it more likely she came across another creepy individual or that PR lied about dropping her off somewhere unspecified? Courts can and do convict on good circumstantial evidence. I think that is good circumstantial evidence. It sounds like the evidence for his previous offences is sound. Surely that would be enough.

 

[HongKongPhooey]

Not only that - it places Libby in the car of an alleged sex offender about to attend court with 90 witnesses and CCTV.

But without any alibi that would come down to an alleged sex offender claiming to have dropped off a very vulnerable young woman somewhere. Nobody sees her again and then she is found dead. Is it more likely she came across another creepy individual or that PR lied about dropping her off somewhere unspecified? Courts can and do convict on good circumstantial evidence. I think that is good circumstantial evidence. It sounds like the evidence for his previous offences is sound. Surely that would be enough.

If only they can bridge that gap between car to river! Hopefully whichever experts they have on board will come up with just that one thing a bit more tangible.

 

[JosieJo]

Of course it's very unlikely he is not involved if he is convicted as a sex offender...but imo that's not enough to charge ...they will have to be able to show some evidence. They cant just presume he harmed her because of other offences.

 

[Newthoughts]

Of course it's very unlikely he is not involved if he is convicted as a sex offender...but imo that's not enough to charge ...they will have to be able to show some evidence. They cant just presume he harmed her because of other offences.

They have good evidence she was in his car within the time frame. We know she is not seen again. They clearly have something linking him to the park. There is a river in the park. So circumstantial evidence is building up.

Lots of people have mentioned surprise that he wasn't charged with more and that stuff has So been removed from SM. So is there a possibility that other possible charges might be being considered relevant in some way? Would account for the police comments about protecting the integrity of the case.

I'm not sure how.

 

[Miss_French]

Is it now known or assumed that PR is the person in that video?

I have read many posts about this sad event but I am confused.

I thought that it is obviously PR. I don't understand why it is taking so long.

He is charged with being a multiple sex offender in the vicinity.
He admits to offering her a lift.
He drives an Astra SXi and the spider video shows an Astra SXi. A car expert earlier in the many threads said that it is a XYZ type Astra SXi and the chances of their being two such cars in the vicinity are very low.
So for the above and other reasons, there is probably a video of him getting LS to get in his car (assuming the spider video is him, and the woman is LS).

Does (or rather did) PR smoke? Did he smoke roll ups? I think that less than 1 in 20 people smoke roll ups.

Does (did) he have pointy boots and tight pants? Many people have some tight pants but boots like those t I have only seen on boxers.

Anyway, is the reason PR is not being charged because
1) The LE (and general pinion) are sure that it is PR, but they want to make sure it sticks?
2) The LE want to get PR on premeditation, not simply opportunistic?
3) OR In spite of all the above, the LE are not sure its him?

Why isn't this open and shut?

Other than the time taken to charge and convict him, is there any reason for thinking it is not PR?

Why do people think there may be accomplice(s)?

It's not been confirmed it's PR in the video and it's not been reported that he admitted to giving Libby a lift; there were comments in the media from his mother quoting one of PR's sisters, any of whom may not have English as a first language, nor do we know the full context or in response to what questions it was said. Speaking generally, having charges against you doesn't mean you are guilty of them or anything else.

It's not open and shut if they don't have evidence of Libby coming to harm because of someone's actions. Opportunism doesn't come into killing someone, it's whether or not there was intent.

 

[JosieJo]

I agree him being proven guilty may be what they need to go ahead with a charge if there evidence is not the best.
So we may see something after that ..but imo if they had very damning evidence they would have charged by now. If they are having to wait for the conviction they haven't got damning evidence as yet

 

[cluciano63]

They can’t use a conviction on other offenses as evidence.

 

[Newthoughts]

I agree him being proven guilty may be what they need to go ahead with a charge if there evidence is not the best.
So we may see something after that ..but imo if they had very damning evidence they would have charged by now. If they are having to wait for the conviction they haven't got damning evidence as yet

We don't know what they've got. There are lots of reasons why they might not have charged him yet.

 

[JosieJo]

We don't know what they've got. There are lots of reasons why they might not have charged him yet.

Absolutely we do not know what they have I just cant think of a reason why they haven't charged him if they have enough.