UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #20

[mrjitty]

I don't think the "chased her into the river" scenario should be considered by the Jury unless the accused puts it as his own case.

The accused is the only person who knows if this really happened - so the jury should not make this speculation if he does not make the case.

 

[Vermont24]

The house at the junction of Claremont and Beresford Avenue has a CCTV camera at the second storey of the rear of the property. Two businesses are listed at this address - a plumbing company, and Claremont Video Services, a 'media transfer specialist'. The latter makes me optimistic that the camera and footage is good quality.

I've posted this view before, and the streetview image is half a decade out of date, but the camera likely covers this area, albeit from a higher vantage point:

Google Maps

 

[Vermont24]

I'd imagine that the field of vision looks something like the attached image. The fact that, when questioned, PR was asked if he had driven beyond Claremont Avenue suggests to me that footage shows he did. If he didn't park in view of the camera, it leaves a very small area in which he could've possibly parked - the tenfoot, or on the area of Oak Road immediately in front of the park which is accessible to vehicles.

 

[Sooty]

Copied from relevant thread :

found in car
Relowicz was shown pictures of a number of vibrators found.

He said: “What am I to say, I don’t know?”

Relowicz said he did not know whose they were but they were not his.

He was asked if he had touched them and whether his DNA would be on them and he said: “I checked everything that was in there because I checked the content of the bag.

“I forgot about them. If these things were mine I would have remembered but they are not mine and I don’t want to answer because I don’t know.

“You do the checks yourself, I’ve got nothing.”

Relowicz said it was “not his” and he “did not want to comment anything'.

He said: “Everything was in that bag and I don’t know this is not mine.”

He was told that inside the sports bag was seven pairs of soiled women’s underwear.

He said: “I know nothing because they are not mine.”

 

[Newthoughts]

ah ok ,i didn't know that I thought it rise its level (I'm not river tide expert) well it little bit messing with my vision ;-)
anyway I still think she could fell into river and die there (as autopsy didn't excluded drowning) and river current could take her body away
I only get my knowledge from photos online and I thought high tide makes river level rise like for example in this article High tide River Dee Feb 1 2014
I just had look here and it has something to do with level of the water https://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/coast-and-sea/tide-tables/3/175#2021-01-24

for me if the level rise from 2,5, to 6m it will make difference on the river bank but I accepting if I'm wrong

Autopsy didn't exclude asphyxiation either!

She was screaming she was silenced minutes before PR left the scene according to a witness. And she was raped. That does sound suspicious to me.

If I had to weigh the two unknowns with no other evidence I'd say the screaming stopping and the process of raping someone would push me towards asphyxiation.

Also somebody has now firmly pointed out to me the river does not change much at that point. Having looked at the videos that were posted earlier of the river of that point, IMO it would be very difficult to fall into it and to be washed away and not caught on reeds or in the mud.

That would be compounded for me by the critical care expert's evidence detailing how difficult she would find it to run away? Do you not think so?

the balance of all other evidence and looking at the video footage of the river I think it highly unlikely that she could have gotten herself into the river unaided.

Then we also have to explain why PR did not say anything about being a near the river and the fact he returned.

 

[Cherwell]

I don't think the "chased her into the river" scenario should be considered by the Jury unless the accused puts it as his own case.

The accused is the only person who knows if this really happened - so the jury should not make this speculation if he does not make the case.

Yes, but we have heard from a witness that there were screams that sounded in different places as though someone was moving (I can't remember the exact wording) so one could draw an inference from that.

 

[Mind your biscuits]

This doesn't sway me for one moment. Who the hell has a sexual encounter with a complete stranger (frequent occurrence, this part is completely normal), you part ways perfectly amicably, go home, have a chat with your wife and a bath (still normal and believable to this point), but THEN, 2 hours after your 7 minutes with a stranger, you are really worried about them and go back to the spot you'd seen them walk away perfectly well and assuming they're going home........ why? How on earth would you think they'd still be there? Hanging around alone in a secluded park? There's no reasonable explanation there. YET. We haven't heard him or his representation yet

Plus, he was in the park at the same time the screaming was heard, he never mentioned hearing any screaming. How is that possible in a dark, quiet empty park after midnight? Bull Poop. Moo.

 

[Vermont24]

I was thinking about the view from the back of The Lodge, the house in which it seems a witness lived. Walking back from the river, I used the wholly unscientific methodology of 'If I can see the window, the window can see me'. Obviously foliage changes from season to season and year to year, but I suspect the line of sight from the back bedroom window is something like the attached image. It's not panoramic, but coming from the direction of the river and abandoned buildings, you'd be in view for a period regardless of which exit you were taking either side of the (locked) car park.

 

[mrazda71]

Yes, but we have heard from a witness that there were screams that sounded in different places as though someone was moving (I can't remember the exact wording) so one could draw an inference from that.

Just because the screams were moving, doesn't mean the screamer was moving by themselves - he could of picked her up and been carrying her.

 

[Cherwell]

Copied from relevant thread :

found in car
Relowicz was shown pictures of a number of vibrators found.

He said: “What am I to say, I don’t know?”

Relowicz said he did not know whose they were but they were not his.

He was asked if he had touched them and whether his DNA would be on them and he said: “I checked everything that was in there because I checked the content of the bag.

“I forgot about them. If these things were mine I would have remembered but they are not mine and I don’t want to answer because I don’t know.

“You do the checks yourself, I’ve got nothing.”

Relowicz said it was “not his” and he “did not want to comment anything'.

He said: “Everything was in that bag and I don’t know this is not mine.”

He was told that inside the sports bag was seven pairs of soiled women’s underwear.

He said: “I know nothing because they are not mine.”

Is this from the earlier trial? I suppose when it came down to it, he decided outright denial was his best policy.

 

[Cherwell]

Just because the screams were moving, doesn't mean the screamer was moving by themselves - he could be picked her up and been carrying her.

That is another inference that could be drawn, yes.

 

[Vermont24]

Finally, two pictures of the river from today. You're more likely to see petroleum barges than people punting on the Hull. It's an industrial river, particularly within the city itself.

Yeast factory with blue dome. The abandoned buildings and 'top left' of the pond are immediately to my right in the same picture.

The second picture is looking in the opposite direction, away from the city centre/Humber estuary.

 

[tigerowl]

Thanks for your posts Vermont. I was genuinely thinking about walking the playing fields myself to satisfy my doubts (or prove myself wrong) on the timings. I'm really interested to hear your thoughts.

 

[Sooty]

Is this from the earlier trial? I suppose when it came down to it, he decided outright denial was his best policy.

this is from his first interview I believe - when he was arrested for abduction.

 

[ChiCubs2016]

I'd imagine that the field of vision looks something like the attached image. The fact that, when questioned, PR was asked if he had driven beyond Claremont Avenue suggests to me that footage shows he did. If he didn't park in view of the camera, it leaves a very small area in which he could've possibly parked - the tenfoot, or on the area of Oak Road immediately in front of the park which is accessible to vehicles.

This is a great view. Gives me a very good perspective of the size of the area. Thanks!

 

[Cherwell]

this is from his first interview I believe - when he was arrested for abduction.

There would have been earlier interviews when he was arrested for the offences of which he was subsequently convicted. I am theorising that this would have come as a complete surprise to him, and that when he was cleaning the car he was only concerned with getting rid of any evidence of Libby.

 

[ChiCubs2016]

Finally, two pictures of the river from today. You're more likely to see petroleum barges than people punting on the Hull. It's an industrial river, particularly within the city itself.

Yeast factory with blue dome. The abandoned buildings and 'top left' of the pond are immediately to my right in the same picture.

The second picture is looking in the opposite direction, away from the city centre/Humber estuary.

Hello @Vermont24 would these areas near the river be the area seen from the house window? The image you showed that may show what the person looking out the window might see? This are great perspectives. Thank you so much!!

 

[Miss_French]

Just went back and had a read, you are right, he didn’t say he heard screams after the toilet- but heard the first screams at 12.14 for between six and seven minutes, then went to the toilet, then carried on looking out of his window for another three or four minutes and then saw a man running out of the park. I wonder how this fits with the yeast factory CCTV, it’s possible it doesn’t and the yeast factory evidence is being used by the defence (and that is why it’s been mentioned, but not by the prosecution). Absolute speculation on my part.

The first part is screams for four to seven minutes from approx 12.15 or 12.16am:

“I woke up, looked at my phone to check a text. It was 12.14am and around a minute or two after that’s when I heard the first scream," he told the court....Mr Alford said the screams carried on for “between four to seven minutes.”

Libby Squire trial told of 'desperate screams' at playing fields

 

[Vermont24]

Hello @Vermont24 would these areas near the river be the area seen from the house window? The image you showed that may show what the person looking out the window might see? This are great perspectives. Thank you so much!!

I'm really not sure, but my gut says no. There's the far treeline at the end of the playing fields and gradient of the embankment to take into consideration. I think anything happening by the river could only possibly be captured by CCTV belonging to the factories and units on the opposite bank.

 

[Skigh]

Do we know if at any time the person viewing from his window switched on the light? If he did could PR have seen it?