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

[Steve2021]

The biggest surprise for me regards his testimony is where he claimed he had sex with her..I fully expected him to say they went into the park.
His testimony is completely new and based on the evidence they had on him.
Everything else is built on trying to escape the evidence.. why on earth did he not want to put himself in the park ?
He could have given exactly the same story regards leaving her because she scratched him etc ...we know he's fitting that in based on other witnesses saying she became angry with them.
I first thought maybe because if he left her in the park they could claim he left her to die more so than if he claimed he left her on the street .... but he has left himself open by expecting people to believe she entered the park herself

Indeed, why on earth didn't he want to put himself in the park? Well maybe he was telling the truth, it did happen outside by the green shed, but he's told that many lies I doubt anyone will believe him. Personally I don't believe him either.

 

[NorthernSoul]

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 have to disagree that there is no evidence Libby was not thinking rationally. She walked in the opposite direction to her house when she left the taxi. She turned up at a strangers house, dropping her keys in their garden; she possibly believed this was her house and was trying to open the door. She veered from asking people to lie on the floor with her to swearing at them. Her speech was in the main incomprehensible. Years ago when I was a student I stupidly became so drunk I experienced a complete blackout on several occasions. I won't go in to the details - too embarrassing! - but I later learned I did things and went to places I would never, ever have had I been sober. I had absolutely no recollection of any of it. Fortunately I came to no harm but I do know what a blackout is and that logic and judgement have completely gone out of the window. As someone mentioned earlier, many women are the victims of rape in similar circumstances at parties and so on and may even have no awareness of what happened. I don't think we can say what Libby would or would not have done as her behaviour was unpredictable. We are trying to use logic in a situation where there was none.

 

[Challwood]

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?[/QUOTE]

I’ve had an awful thought that maybe she blacked out/fell asleep in the car on the way to Oak Road. I believe he mentions her being on her knees at one point and her laying on the grass before the ‘consensual’ sex/rape. Maybe this part of his account is true and this happened either by the car when he’s tried to get her out when they’ve arrived at Oak Road or maybe he’s carried her into the park. I’m still undecided about where I think she was attacked (the bench visited by forensics is still in my mind) But I have wondered if she may only have woken during the sexual assault and this is when she’s scratched out at him and screamed for help.
I had also wondered if there’s is further cctv from Oak road that hasn’t been publicly released as I’ve read some reports of cctv showing them both leaving the car but only PR returning but on the clips that we’ve seen there’s only flashing lights as the car’s been locked/unlocked.
If there is further cctv it would clear up any doubts about LS conscious state when they arrived at Oak Road and if she was able to walk from the car unaided. I think we’ll only find out a lot of information after the trial has ended and also that some cctv may never be released upon her families request.

All MOO

 

[Newthoughts]

Does anyone know off hand how many of his previous night time pleasurings were reported before Libby went missing? Did the police have a folder full of reports or were most of these reported after his arrest?

it’s clear they connected him to Libby from the numerous CCTV cameras he was caught on so surely if any of these previous crimes were reported and investigated at the time he would have been picked up doing them on CCTV also.. I’m just thinking if they were reported and investigated he might not have even been out prowling the streets that night but rather banged up already.

The one I know of, the theft just before Libby, was reported an officer went out and prints and statements were taken. He was linked to that because the stuff was found in his boot.

The one were he was watching a student thru the window was also reported because she later said she'd had to get her parents involved before the police came out and took prints. Her dad had to wash off the DNA evidence.

Many of the others must have been reported because he was linked to them by DNA taken either from condoms or doors. For example the door in her street where he claimed he'd urinated after having sex. All those would have flagged as matches on the database but no suspect to match them to.

But as far as a thorough investigation goes - I don't think they bothered. The police have been cut to the bone so unless it's a very serious crime like rape or very easy to solve they probably won't.

If you look at his previous charges - there was an image of him which looked silly till you saw him and we've now heard some victims knew he was Polish. At the end of his street is a Polish shop and round the corner on Cottingham Road is massive catholic church which is probably used by the Polish community. With some collation of evidence and probably just popping his image there - he might have been caught. Or he might not.

 

[Newthoughts]

I agree, it’s not a perfect fit of evidence. The 7.5 minutes is the time his car was parked up. The screaming begins at 12.14 and his car is pulling away at 12.19 and is in Beverley Road CCTV at 12.20.

So there are two attacks going on in the park?

 

[Newthoughts]

I have to disagree that there is no evidence Libby was not thinking rationally. She walked in the opposite direction to her house when she left the taxi. She turned up at a strangers house, dropping her keys in their garden; she possibly believed this was her house and was trying to open the door. She veered from asking people to lie on the floor with her to swearing at them. Her speech was in the main incomprehensible. Years ago when I was a student I stupidly became so drunk I experienced a complete blackout on several occasions. I won't go in to the details - too embarrassing! - but I later learned I did things and went to places I would never, ever have had I been sober. I had absolutely no recollection of any of it. Fortunately I came to no harm but I do know what a blackout is and that logic and judgement have completely gone out of the window. As someone mentioned earlier, many women are the victims of rape in similar circumstances at parties and so on and may even have no awareness of what happened. I don't think we can say what Libby would or would not have done as her behaviour was unpredictable. We are trying to use logic in a situation where there was none.

We have expert witness testimony that says Libby was probably hypothermic and therefore not thinking rationally. But not that she would necessarily black out.

It was apparent to everyone that she was vulnerable.

But it's unlikely that any state of confusion would lead you into a dark park.

 

[Tortoise]

So there are two attacks going on in the park?

Screaming doesn't necessarily indicate attack, it's distress. Libby could have been screaming for someone to help her, severely disorientated and hampered by numb feet in the snow.

 

[tigerowl]

Re his previous offences. I live smack bang in the middle of the area he was doing these and I didn't know anything about them at the time. There had been no public info shared, no police presence, no local press.

There is a very large Polish community around here. Very well integrated into the area. I suspect they would have been supportive of finding any perpetrator if it had been made more public.

 

[Cherwell]

Sorry - I don't know all the details, but could you tell my who, when or why they would have been described as light?
Thank you.

Probably mistakenly by me. I thought SA said "light". I must have confused it with another description. He doesn't appear to have said "tight" though.

On another note, do some posters realise they are referring to the defendant as PW? His initials are PR.
Or is it an in-joke and it stands for Polish ?
ETA .... or even public wank(er)

 

[bos]

Sorry - I don't know all the details, but could you tell my who, when or why they would have been described as light?
Thank you.

There is confusion about this imo: I’ve seen light, tight and dark all reported

Edited to add screenshots - Tom Wilkinson PA & Lucy Leeson Yorkshire Post both use “”tightly fitted”; Sophie Corcoran Hull Daily Mail uses “dark tightly fitted”

I think @Cherwell argued that light was more discernible than tight by a witness and that is where light has appeared from IMO

 

[Cherwell]

There is confusion about this imo: I’ve seen light, tight and dark all reported

Edited to add screenshots - Tom Wilkinson PA & Lucy Leeson Yorkshire Post both use “”tightly fitted”; Sophie Corcoran Hull Daily Mail uses “dark tightly fitted”

I think @Cherwell argued that light was more discernible than tight by a witness and that is where light has appeared from IMO

I think what he meant was that IF the man was wearing joggers (rather than jeans), they were not loose and baggy as such garments usually are, which is why he said "fitted". That doesn't translate as "tight" to me - just not baggy.

 

[Steve2021]

Sorry - I don't know all the details, but could you tell my who, when or why they would have been described as light?
Thank you.

I'm now wondering myself. I've been back to the prosecution opening statement which simply mentions he was wearing jeans with 2 black bands that circle the calf on the left leg. Certainly in this forum there's been plenty of reference to light jeans. Maybe that's a red herring or someone else can recall where in the trial light was mentioned.

 

[tedtink]

I'm now wondering myself. I've been back to the prosecution opening statement which simply mentions he was wearing jeans with 2 black bands that circle the calf on the left leg. Certainly in this forum there's been plenty of reference to light jeans. Maybe that's a red herring or someone else can recall where in the trial light was mentioned.

Thank you.
Possibly a red herring as the CCTV shows them as 'light'?
When in fact they could have been darker and it's the infrared that make them appear to be 'light'?

 

[NorthernSoul]

We have expert witness testimony that says Libby was probably hypothermic and therefore not thinking rationally. But not that she would necessarily black out.

It was apparent to everyone that she was vulnerable.

But it's unlikely that any state of confusion would lead you into a dark park.[/QUO

I fully respect your opinion and your valid and interesting points but even if Libby did not experience a blackout we have evidence she took unexpected decisions and went in directions that would not have seemed logical. She did this more than once before ever meeting PR.
I don't want to sound as if I am pushing this scenario! I have already stated that I believe it likely that PR is guilty of murder. However, I believe everyone has a right to a fair trial and it is the job of the prosecution to prove he is guilty. I'm unsure as to whether they have reached this benchmark.
I've been doing a bit of research on the law regarding this as I don't have much expertise in this area. I discovered that the "balance of probability" is acceptable in finding someone guilty in civil cases but not in criminal cases. I hope I'm not breaking any rules by posting a really valuable quote on this I found on a law site which explains:

The burden to prove this guilt, in most cases, rests on the prosecution who has to convince the rational mind of the same. The basis of decision in civil litigation is a mere preponderance of probability whereas the basis in criminal trials the assurance expected is much greater, although this depends from a case to case basis. The nature of the evidence and material put on record. For example, for a given situation, the evidence produced maybe sufficient to prove an act for the purposes of civil litigation but the same evidence may not be considered adequate to prove a fact in criminal cases. The more blatant and deliberate a criminal act seems to be, the more is the need for it to proved with certainty. This is perhaps to avoid the severe consequences arising from a wrongful conviction.

Especially in criminal cases, an impartial moral conviction cannot be the sole basis for sentencing the accused but must be backed by such findings and evidence that prove that no other chain of events except the one endorsing the conviction is reasonably possible.

 

[Vermont24]

I've just come back from another trip to Oak Road. For the benefit of anyone who is having trouble getting their bearings, I thought I'd mark up the locations of the domestic CCTV shown in the clip below:

Libby Squire trial CCTV

Firstly, tip of the cap to @phildav76 for identifying the correct house. The CCTV is showing a very limited view of Oak Road itself, obscured by a fence and foliage. I've marked the location and direction of both cameras, as well as the rough location of PR's car, in the attached image. He's driven about as far as you can go along Oak Road, up close to the bollards.

CAM01, the first view we see, is a spherical cam mounted to a pole and is showing roughly this area of the tenfoot:
Google Maps

CAM02 is mounted to the house and is looking down the back garden, explaining why it only gives a partial view of headlights, possibly even just their beam, to the top left of the footage.

 

[Dotta]

Amen to that. RE Northern Soul post above.

 

[NorthernSoul]

In response to Newthoughts! Don't know why my previous post did not show up.
I fully respect your opinion and your valid and interesting points but even if Libby did not experience a blackout we have evidence she took unexpected decisions and went in directions that would not have seemed logical. She did this more than once before ever meeting PR.
I don't want to sound as if I am pushing this scenario! I have already stated that I believe it likely that PR is guilty of murder. However, I believe everyone has a right to a fair trial and it is the job of the prosecution to prove he is guilty. I'm unsure as to whether they have reached this benchmark.
I've been doing a bit of research on the law regarding this as I don't have much expertise in this area. I discovered that the "balance of probability" is acceptable in finding someone guilty in civil cases but not in criminal cases. I hope I'm not breaking any rules by posting a really valuable quote on this I found on a law site which explains:

The burden to prove this guilt, in most cases, rests on the prosecution who has to convince the rational mind of the same. The basis of decision in civil litigation is a mere preponderance of probability whereas the basis in criminal trials the assurance expected is much greater, although this depends from a case to case basis. The nature of the evidence and material put on record. For example, for a given situation, the evidence produced maybe sufficient to prove an act for the purposes of civil litigation but the same evidence may not be considered adequate to prove a fact in criminal cases. The more blatant and deliberate a criminal act seems to be, the more is the need for it to proved with certainty. This is perhaps to avoid the severe consequences arising from a wrongful conviction.

Especially in criminal cases, an impartial moral conviction cannot be the sole basis for sentencing the accused but must be backed by such findings and evidence that prove that no other chain of events except the one endorsing the conviction is reasonably possible.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

Mr Wright said: “This is not a coincidence that there was another man in tight trousers attacking a woman by the river that night. This man was you and Libby Squire was screaming and she was screaming because you were overpowering her, raping her and attacking her”.

Pawel Relowicz 'stalked second woman hours after murdering Libby'

 

[Zazie]

I’ve had an awful thought that maybe she blacked out/fell asleep in the car on the way to Oak Road. I believe he mentions her being on her knees at one point and her laying on the grass before the ‘consensual’ sex/rape. Maybe this part of his account is true and this happened either by the car when he’s tried to get her out when they’ve arrived at Oak Road or maybe he’s carried her into the park. I’m still undecided about where I think she was attacked (the bench visited by forensics is still in my mind) But I have wondered if she may only have woken during the sexual assault and this is when she’s scratched out at him and screamed for help.
I had also wondered if there’s is further cctv from Oak road that hasn’t been publicly released as I’ve read some reports of cctv showing them both leaving the car but only PR returning but on the clips that we’ve seen there’s only flashing lights as the car’s been locked/unlocked.
If there is further cctv it would clear up any doubts about LS conscious state when they arrived at Oak Road and if she was able to walk from the car unaided. I think we’ll only find out a lot of information after the trial has ended and also that some cctv may never be released upon her families request. All MOO

Agree Libby's apparent total silence exiting the car needs an explanation. Oak Road at Beresford Ave is so close to the Claremont Ave houses, yet nobody hears anything til the screaming by the pond. Before Libby enters PR's car she is vocal, crying, screaming and shouting, according to numerous witnesses. I guess the four options are - she is silent exiting the car because she doesn't feel threatened (unlikely, as you'd still expect some loud drunken conversation), because he was threatening her eg a knife to the throat, because she was unconscious, or because she was gagged. The other option - she was dead - I discount because of the subsequent screams.

I also wonder whether more footage exists actually showing figures with the car at the playing fields. How can they prove PR left alone if all they can see is headlights? Is it based purely on his arrival at Raglan St, or did the jury see additional footage?

One Q I have and it's such a basic one at this stage, I feel embarrassed asking, but are we all assuming PR drove into the car park? The trial only seems to report him arriving at the playing fields. During the search for Libby, a police car parked across the entrance, to prevent cars getting in, which made me think it must be ungated. Also I'm not sure the yeast factory CCTV could have picked up the car's lights unless he'd gone into the car park, although I'm not 100% sure.

(Edit: while I was writing this Vermont24 posted the helpful CCTV map, so I see I've been barking up the wrong tree re where PR parked - thanks for that!)

Google Maps

 

[Jarvis1969]

He was looking for sex or to masturbate. I do not think this was his first time cruising the streets looking for sex. I think it could be highly probable he has raped before.

I agree with you, I wonder if there will be any other charges relating to other woman once this trial is over?