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

[Sooty]

The prosecutor has been reported to have asked jurors to "use their common sense", which always gets law students worked up. Many will say you don't do that if you think you're over the line with the evidence.

I agree - asking for ‘common sense’ to be applied can only be problematic- it does not suggest objectivity.

 

[Ruthbullock]

Not much doubt about what the judge thinks I reckon.

Agreed- he’s making it very clear and simple for the jury.

I hadn't realised that Libby had already dropped her keys before heading to the Welly. I guess this explains why she didn't even attempt to get inside her house when the taxi dropped her off. She must have realised she'd lost her keys.

She hadn’t, it was the house she visited after she had been to her own house (the one where the female students let her in)

 

[Lyall0814]

I agree - asking for ‘common sense’ to be applied can only be problematic- it does not suggest objectivity.

I think he has no chance with the rape charge, but plenty of law students will be saying murder hasn't been proven. I think the 'common sense' of a jury will convict him for murder though.

 

[Winterbells]

Agreed- he’s making it very clear and simple for the jury.

She hadn’t, it was the house she visited after she had been to her own house (the one where the female students let her in)

Well that's what I thought until I read the Prosecutor's summary. He says after she left her house, she dropped her keys in a 'their' garden and therefore had no chance to get back inside her house when she returned in the taxi, so 'walked on'. It doesn't really matter though, in the end.

 

[Sooty]

I think he has no chance with the rape charge, but plenty of law students will be saying murder hasn't been proven. I think the 'common sense' of a jury will convict him for murder though.

I do agree with you - how safe a conviction would that be though? That’s my concern.

 

[Steve2021]

So far as the tight 7.5 minute window is concerned I've concluded it's analagous to watching a magician. You don't necessarily need to have to understand how he did it to know he did and that it wasn't by magic.

Rereading the evidence on the screaming it seems that given by SA and the Claremont witnesses is wildly different. SA said it lasted 4-7 minutes, the female Claremont resident said...

“I told Drew to be quiet so I could listen further and I heard it around three times. It lasted five to ten seconds each scream and there was a period of 15 to 20 second between the screams that I heard.

That's just 45 seconds minimum for the whole episode, 70 seconds, max!

So discounting they heard separate incidents it shows how unreliable recollections can be, and I suggest how one may only attach limited weight to them.

Pawel Relowicz returns to witness stand as week two of trial ends

 

[HongKongPhooey]

Catching up - have I missed the final defence witness? Bit confused how we're at summing up already (sorry, skimming quickly during my own break)

 

[Mommysleuth11]

Apologies as I haven't fully caught up and so far haven't read any of todays evidence.

I again see the issue of the River Hull and its tides/currents coming up once more.
This blog i found speaks clearly of the currents and effects on a small(ish) boat attempting to navigate the river from Beverley to the Humber and beyond. There are images (the ones between Ennerdale and Stoneferry bridges) are of the relevant area and clearly show a low water level with parts of the bank exposed. I hope this finally settles once and for all for those in any doubt that it IS indeed tidal and the water level DOES change.
Besides that the info on the currents is pretty useful to help imagine quite how strong and scary they are even to someone apparently used to navigating waterways.

NB Holderness: Hull helter skelter.

 

[Scorpiette]

So far as the tight 7.5 minute window is concerned I've concluded it's analagous to watching a magician. You don't necessarily need to have to understand how he did it to know he did and that it wasn't by magic.

Rereading the evidence on the screaming it seems that given by SA and the Claremont witnesses is wildly different. SA said it lasted 4-7 minutes, the female Claremont resident said...

“I told Drew to be quiet so I could listen further and I heard it around three times. It lasted five to ten seconds each scream and there was a period of 15 to 20 second between the screams that I heard.

That's just 70 seconds, max!

So discounting they heard separate incidents it shows how unreliable recollections can be, and I suggest how one may only attach limited weight to them.

Pawel Relowicz returns to witness stand as week two of trial ends

SA and the other 2 witnesses say there was 'a pattern' to the screams, the intermittent breaks in between. I've been trying to work out the explanation for the breaks and what was happening in between to poor Libby (if it was her)? Although my mind doesn't really want to go there...to me, the breaks implies she was not alone perhaps?

 

[Mommysleuth11]

My thoughy today with Libbys family, friends and loved ones. 2 whole years have passed and I imagine the pain is just as great for them still, particularly with dealing with these last 2 weeks of evidence and making it feel much more recent again.
Always remembering Libby ❤

 

[Lyall0814]

Catching up - have I missed the final defence witness? Bit confused how we're at summing up already (sorry, skimming quickly during my own break)

There was just a statement or two read out, and seems like there was no dispute about them.

 

[Sarahjo]

This wouldn't be murder due to a break in the chain of causation. She didn't die by being left in the park directly but by ending up in the river. The river is like a new supervening cause which he didn't directly intend.

I agree it could be manslaughter so his assault and leaving her there contributed to her death - he should have realised she could die alone in the freezing park - so more in the negligence direction

but if he didn’t leave her actually inside the park and rather outside the park on the street could it still be deemed negligent manslaughter?

edited by me

 

[HongKongPhooey]

There was just a statement or two read out, and seems like there was no dispute about them.

Thank you!

 

[CoverMeCagney]

Aside from Libby’s heartbroken family and friends, this must be dreadful for those who tried to help her that night - the male neighbours, the girls who took her into their house, and all the people who tried to help her in the street. So many lives affected forever

 

[Cherwell]

I agree - asking for ‘common sense’ to be applied can only be problematic- it does not suggest objectivity.

He was using the phrase with specific reference to the context of what PR claims was consensual sex, not generally to the entire case. Not sure if that makes a difference.

Well that's what I thought until I read the Prosecutor's summary. He says after she left her house, she dropped her keys in a 'their' garden and therefore had no chance to get back inside her house when she returned in the taxi, so 'walked on'. It doesn't really matter though, in the end.

It's the reporter's summary of the prosecution speech. I wouldn't assume it's 100% accurate and complete.

 

[Skigh]

Catching up - have I missed the final defence witness? Bit confused how we're at summing up already (sorry, skimming quickly during my own break)

Final defence witness was just someone who described how he heard Libby screaming on the street as he was walking down the road at 11:30pm.He did not stop to help her.

 

[Steve2021]

I'd be interested to know from MrJitty or any legal expert whether the jury are able to consider the possibility PR did enter the park and left Libby there, and she either fell in the river or was put in by an unknown 3rd party...bearing in mind no evidence has been put forward for this hypothesis and that the only evidence from the defence is the direct opposite (that he never entered park).

If so it wouldn't rule out arguing Libby found her own way from the road to the river or was abducted by someone else who took her there...but as I've said before there's not much time for her to get there in time for her to start screaming at the times suggested by the witnesses.

 

[jamjim]

14:09
'Rape led to murder', prosecution claim

The trial has resumed and prosecutor Richard Wright QC calims Relowicz murdered Libby to cover up the rape.

He said: “It’s convenient to him that she ends up dead in the River Hull. We submit rape led to murder. You know she screamed and fought and she had to be silenced."

Libby Squire murder trial live updates: Prosecution give closing speech

 

[Alyce]

Catching up - have I missed the final defence witness? Bit confused how we're at summing up already (sorry, skimming quickly during my own break)

Yes, it was the guy who saw Libby at the bench about 11.30pm when he was walking up Beverley Road
A bit out of synch, but I guess it was perhaps the only time they could fit him in ?

 

[jamjim]

14:12
'Cause of death unknown but still murder'

Mr Wright says the cuase of death does not have to be known for the jury to find it was murder.

He said: “You know that in this case, despite all of the careful examination and analysis conducted, the cause of Libby Squire’s death is unascertained.

"That is to say there are a number of possibilities. Asphyxiation, drowning, hypothermia and a combination of all.

“In one sense the defence are right to say the prosecution cannot say as to why Libby Squire died. But the prosecution is not required to prove that.

"What they are required to prove is that there was an unlawful act by Pawel Relowicz that caused Libby Squire’s death - not just any cause, but a cause."

Libby Squire murder trial live updates: Prosecution give closing speech