UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #22

[Tortoise]

True. Could she be screaming from the water? If PW had said they'd been in the park then the defence could suggest after he left she'd accidentally fallen in. Well they could still suggest that but surely it's unbelievable she'd have found her way there at all, let alone in the short time window available. So PW's only hope in my book is the jury believing someone else may well have killed her.

It's not really a short time window - with screams heard at about 12:30am.

The pathologist didn't rule out drowning.

 

[Newthoughts]

Newthoughts, thank you for your long and lucid analysis. That would certainly in my opinion be overwhelmingly the most likely explanation. You do however state at the end that it was PW on the balance of probabilities, which I think it's hard to disagree with, and which of course is sufficient for a civil case, but the jury will have to find it beyond reasonable doubt.

I think it will all come down to the the evidence of Mr Alford and the Claremont witnesses, and as to how certain or not they were. If Mr Alford said the man absolutely definitely had dark not light jeans on, or for example was skinny, it can't have been PW he saw. If he said the man was some way off, he didn't get that clear a view, he thought the jeans were dark but could be mistaken, it would be easy to simply dismiss his evidence. I am a bit surprised these witnesses weren't in the box longer, so maybe both sides figured they added little either way. Also presumably the prosecution knew what Mr Alford was going to say, so if he was going to describe with total certainty a man who couldn't have been PW would they have proceeded with a murder charge? Again we've only heard a sample of this. I would imagine the jury have long since concluded PW would say anything to help his case, thus they are disinclined to believe anything he has said that does help it. I think as far as his defence is concerned his evidence is a total write off.

Also I guess not impossible PW who from other footage was the owner of a camo style jacket and appeared to be wearing it when at Tesco that night, could have taken it off and have had a more bomber style top underneath.

As to how Libby got to the river I believe any suggestion she wandered into the park after PW left to be ludicrous. Yes she was drunk and emotionally upset but I see no evidence that she was incapable of any rational thought. Yes she was unsteady on her feet but the earlier footage shows her successfully crossing a main road and avoiding the traffic, and I see no evidence to suggest she was so out of it she had no idea where she was. I do wonder if the defence will suggest suicide, which I consider even more preposterous. I suspect they won't as I don't think it will play well with the jury.

Someone just asked could the rape have occurred post death, and I wouldn't by any means discount that.

I have wondered how PW (or the random stranger if not PW) got poor Libby maybe 200m into the park before anyone heard any screams. Maybe she ran and he chased? Maybe she fell asleep and he carried her? Any thoughts?

I think it is very easy for a 14 stone fit man to get a vulnerable, slim, drunk young woman anywhere he wants before she even realises what's happening.

I've seen my daughter's boyfriend run down a beach with her. Many years ago when thinner I've had boyfriends carry me while running. PR wasn't a delicate little flower. Drag. Carry. Easy.

Beyond all reasonable doubt has to be on probabilities of an explanation for a set of evidence against alternative explanations . That is ALL the evidence and ALL the alternatives. People should be examining the WHOLE picture because one set of probabilities alters the likelihood of another. E.g. knowing Libby's watch was found by spidercam increases the probability it was her Etc

Is it more likely that PR was man in park or there were two similar men. The park is dark, it's minus five - so two men less likely.

Has CCTV picked up anyone else entering the park - not mentioned. I'm sure the defence would be all over it of they had. So again less likely someone else. Other pieced of evidence place PR there - increases likelihood it's him.

Second can you completely exclude PR as being that man in park. No - nothing excludes him for any rational person.

The witness isn't identifying him. He's seeing him from a distance at night. He isn't going to see the patterns on his camo jacket, or his hair colour or his shoes. He's saying a man left the park after screams.

If he'd said man with flowing hair or man in long cape or man or woman - PR could be excluded. Now the probability of two men is stronger. But PR wasn't excluded.

So it could easily be PR or it could be another man. But that isn't all you've got.

You've got spidercam. A camo jacket which showed up in bright Tesco CCTV isn't clear here. Tesco footage was only shown to illustrate his trousers and shoes for spidercam later.

Could you clearly tell what top he's wearing in spidercam? From zero knowledge of him? Seeing him once.

Can you clearly describe his trousers? If you had to describe him from that would it match Tesco's exactly? But we know that is PR - again cos of other evidence.

So make it a bit darker and he's moving. Could you see his camo top now? How accurate is your description of his trousers now? Two men in the freezing cold dark park? No CCTV evidence of the second

But we also have screams before man is seen. Coming from near the pond by the river. At the point where PR and Libby are apparently down by the green shed

Is it more likely that while Libby was being attacked by the shed another woman was screaming by the river? Nothing has been reported therefore that's less likely. No CCTV evidence.

So either Libby is raped. Runs to that point to scream. Meets man number two and runs back to scratch PR before heading back to the river to fall in. Or another woman is being attacked by another man and PR doesn't hear it.

When arrested he doesn't say 'well actually now you mention it I heard screaming so I left Libby and legged it'

So is that more likely than PR being the only man there and Libby the only screams.

But you don't just have that evidence. You don't have other man on CCTV. You don't have other woman on CCTV. You don't have another woman's body or any trace of her.

But you have more evidence. You have PR lying about leaving Libby untouched. Why risk it when he now tells us he's had sex? Why on Earth is he risking saying he didn't have sex when Humberside police, half the uni and half the residents of Hull are looking for her and they'll find your DNA.

PR is balancing probabilities there. If he left her where he says the chances are she'll be found. High risk - tell them you had sex. Unless you know the probability that that DNA would be found if low?

You have to look at ALL the evidence. If you saw 20 clocks saying 2.30 and one saying 3.30 what time would you say it was most likely to be be.

As for the when he killed her. IMO whilst raping her or as he finished. His previous offending suggests he likes fear.

 

[Dotta]

Apologies I think I've been calling him PW...I don't know why but I'll be careful not to again.

His name is PaWeł - so maybe that's why.

 

[Newthoughts]

Deleted duplicate

 

[jamjim]

It will be interesting to see what comes out after the trial ends.Not long to wait.

I agree. Same thing happened with Grace Millane’s killer. I won’t be surprised at all if more people have come forward.

 

[Jarvis1969]

But this case has been in the news for nearly 2 years now. Surely if there were more rape victims of PR they would have contacted the police by now.

But would they be allowed to report it as it may affect the juries decision? Im not sure tbh?

 

[Newthoughts]

It's not really a short time window - with screams heard at about 12:30am.

The pathologist didn't rule out drowning.

He didn't rule out asphyxiation either.

 

[Newthoughts]

But this case has been in the news for nearly 2 years now. Surely if there were more rape victims of PR they would have contacted the police by now.

We don't know they haven't. I don't think police wouldn't risk a live trial by either charging him or putting it in the public domain.

He wasn't charged for this until after his previous trial.

 

[Tortoise]

He didn't rule out asphyxiation either.

But that's not relevant to screams heard after PR left, which was the point of discussion.

 

[Newthoughts]

But that's not relevant to screams heard after PR left, which was the point of discussion.

Identical screams to the first set of screams. Yet neither witness heard two sets of screams. Why not?

 

[Tortoise]

Identical screams to the first set of screams. Yet neither witness heard two sets of screams. Why not?

Probably the same set of screams, as per earlier posts today.

 

[Steve2021]

Newthoughts, a very impressive and persuasive analysis once again may I say. The prosecution could do a lot worse than getting you in to make their closing speech.

 

[Vermont24]

We don't know they haven't. I don't think police wouldn't risk a live trial by either charging him or putting it in the public domain.

He wasn't charged for this until after his previous trial.

This is true. The HDM haven't even been linking to the live updates on their Facebook page, presumably to avoid speculation and any comments which could endanger the trial.

 

[Newthoughts]

Shucks thanks. @Steve2021

 

[Ruthbullock]

So there are two attacks going on in the park?

No idea!

 

[Zazie]

True. Could she be screaming from the water? If PW had said they'd been in the park then the defence could suggest after he left she'd accidentally fallen in. Well they could still suggest that but surely it's unbelievable she'd have found her way there at all, let alone in the short time window available. So PW's only hope in my book is the jury believing someone else may well have killed her.

I doubt she would have been able to scream repeatedly and at the volume the witnesses described, from the water. From what I read, sudden immersion in freezing water would cause hyperventilation, a gasp reflex (which can lead you to gulp water), and muscle paralysis.

 

[Dotta]

I doubt she would have been able to scream repeatedly and at the volume the witnesses described, from the water. From what I read, sudden immersion in freezing water would cause hyperventilation, a gasp reflex (which can lead you to gulp water), and muscle paralysis.

And even heart attack as in cons against winter/ice swimming.

 

[Emerald1328]

Can someone confirm if the public masturbation incident occurred after the 2nd or 3rd visit to the park?

 

[DiploRed]

I know this is obvious but we have three sides to this story in regards to the screams. Screams were heard by all three sides but at different times. This confirms someone is lying and I would bet the liar is PR!

Can someone remind me, wasn’t there two witnesses from the nearby street? Two different households who heard screaming at 12:30? That would make it even more confusing because I can’t understand why the guy from the house on Oak Road didn’t hear it.

 

[Ruthbullock]

Identical screams to the first set of screams. Yet neither witness heard two sets of screams. Why not?

And even stranger is that all three witnesses heard some if not all the screams after PR has driven away