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

[ForensicToxicologist]

Hi all. So many thoughts after finally catching up. I apologize for writing a book on here. For the record, I believe PR is guilty of rape and causing Libby’s death. I hope he stays behind bars. With that said, I have some things to share. My opinion may not be a popular one, but I believe it’s important. It’s not meant to attack, upset, or offend anyone, so if it does, please know it’s not my intention and then “scroll and roll”.

First, in regards to some thinking he may be mentally ill and others saying no way because he couldn’t stand trial if so... He could have a mental illness AND stand trial. There is a huge difference between mentally ill and insane (which would be cause for the insanity plea where there would still be a trial but a diminished charge and sentence possibility). I have depression and anxiety so I’m technically mentally ill. However, there is absolutely no way I wouldn’t be held fully responsible for any of my actions. I would never do anything like this of course, but even if I did, I know the difference between right and wrong and would therefore stand trial as any other person would. It’s possible to be mentally ill without reduced responsibility. Addiction is a mental illness, but doesn’t reduce responsibility. For example, an alcoholic is mentally ill and needs help. But no one would argue and say “They’re an alcoholic. It’s not their fault they drove drunk and killed a family. You can’t charge them!” I believe it is the same with PR. He shows signs of a sexual addiction and psychopathic tendencies (mental illnesses) but appears fully aware of right and wrong actions which means he deserves no leniency in trial.

Now, in regards to being found guilty. I’m in forensics. I understand evidence and trials. The prosecution has used EVIDENCE TO PROVE that PR raped LS. But, at this point, with what WE have heard and seen from the trial, they have not provided evidence to PROVE beyond reasonable doubt that he murdered her. You must remember that we here at WS have had the privilege of analyzing and following this case from the beginning. We have read tons of articles. People have been amazing and sleuthed the park and river. It’s been great, and it’s the reason I truly believe he is guilty. BUT, the jurors have had no such luxury. They are only allowed to consider the evidence and testimony provided in court. Of course, we may not have seen or heard exactly everything from court that they have, so maybe there is enough. But based only on what has been reported by the media, the prosecution has not, at this time, provided enough proof beyond reasonable doubt that PR is guilty of murder. It’s easy to get caught up in our feelings and opinions and all the info we have and say he is definitely guilty. Heaven help us if courts ever allow juries to convict on “feelings” though. Remember, they can only consider what is said and shown in court. Nothing else they may have seen and heard along the way. In fact, they try to find juries with little knowledge of the case and they are instructed not to research it as it creates a bias and a reason for appeals and mistrials. So, if I was a juror, based on what we have seen from court, I would bot be willing to convict him of murder right now. I would however have zero issue finding him guilty of negligent homicide or manslaughter.

Just my opinion. Congrats if you made it to the end of this!

 

[Challwood]

I also wonder all this. Are the prosecution going to bring this out when hes in the stand to prove he's lieing or should this have been shown before hes on the stand? I'm not sure especially as some circumstances such as previous crimes were allowed to be a big factor than usual cases imo

Long term lurker but first time answering so not sure if I’m doing it right. They have been shown the cctv footage of the car arriving and leaving. Hull mails summary of everything that’s been heard this week states that it was taken from cctv cameras at the rear of houses on Claremont Avenue.
Libby Squire murder trial key moments as prosecution closes case

 

[Newthoughts]

Hi all. So many thoughts after finally catching up. I apologize for writing a book on here. For the record, I believe PR is guilty of rape and causing Libby’s death. I hope he stays behind bars. With that said, I have some things to share. My opinion may not be a popular one, but I believe it’s important. It’s not meant to attack, upset, or offend anyone, so if it does, please know it’s not my intention and then “scroll and roll”.

First, in regards to some thinking he may be mentally ill and others saying no way because he couldn’t stand trial if so... He could have a mental illness AND stand trial. There is a huge difference between mentally ill and insane (which would be cause for the insanity plea where there would still be a trial but a diminished charge and sentence possibility). I have depression and anxiety so I’m technically mentally ill. However, there is absolutely no way I wouldn’t be held fully responsible for any of my actions. I would never do anything like this of course, but even if I did, I know the difference between right and wrong and would therefore stand trial as any other person would. It’s possible to be mentally ill without reduced responsibility. Addiction is a mental illness, but doesn’t reduce responsibility. For example, an alcoholic is mentally ill and needs help. But no one would argue and say “They’re an alcoholic. It’s not their fault they drove drunk and killed a family. You can’t charge them!” I believe it is the same with PR. He shows signs of a sexual addiction and psychopathic tendencies (mental illnesses) but appears fully aware of right and wrong actions which means he deserves no leniency in trial.

Now, in regards to being found guilty. I’m in forensics. I understand evidence and trials. The prosecution has used EVIDENCE TO PROVE that PR raped LS. But, at this point, with what WE have heard and seen from the trial, they have not provided evidence to PROVE beyond reasonable doubt that he murdered her. You must remember that we here at WS have had the privilege of analyzing and following this case from the beginning. We have read tons of articles. People have been amazing and sleuthed the park and river. It’s been great, and it’s the reason I truly believe he is guilty. BUT, the jurors have had no such luxury. They are only allowed to consider the evidence and testimony provided in court. Of course, we may not have seen or heard exactly everything from court that they have, so maybe there is enough. But based only on what has been reported by the media, the prosecution has not, at this time, provided enough proof beyond reasonable doubt that PR is guilty of murder. It’s easy to get caught up in our feelings and opinions and all the info we have and say he is definitely guilty. Heaven help us if courts ever allow juries to convict on “feelings” though. Remember, they can only consider what is said and shown in court. Nothing else they may have seen and heard along the way. In fact, they try to find juries with little knowledge of the case and they are instructed not to research it as it creates a bias and a reason for appeals and mistrials. So, if I was a juror, based on what we have seen from court, I would bot be willing to convict him of murder right now. I would however have zero issue finding him guilty of negligent homicide or manslaughter.

Just my opinion. Congrats if you made it to the end of this!

In the case of Milly Dowler only partial remains were found after 6 months. There was no cause of death and no forensics at all linking her to Levi Bellfield as it took 9 years to charge him yet the jury decided beyond all reasonable doubt that he had murdered her based on other evidence presented.

In this case there is far more evidence placing PR with Libby - including her rape.

I'm interested in your opinion on the Milly Dowler case and a prosecution beyond all reasonable doubt and why the other evidence in this case is not the same when it is far stronger?

Only asking because like you I'm sure he's guilty based on what little we've heard here. I also think he's very dangerous and will offend again after release.

 

[JosieJo]

He has never stated that he went that far into the park with Libby so doesn't that preclude questions about timing as a defence?

The caution clearly states that "you do not have to say anything but It may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely in court"

I guess to stop defendants refusing to answer questions but then suddenly coming up with things in court when they couldn't be questioned or examined on it.

After his initial interview where he lied he resorted to 'no comment' so I'm not sure how he can query things he has chosen to refuse to address before when ample chance was given?

It would need a legal person to clarify whether that's allowed.

Plus I think he'd be on dodgy ground as clearly he had time to go into that park to rape. The subtle asphyxiation detailed by the expert could easily be part of that and how long does it take to throw somebody into a river if you're already close?

"But Mr Wright told the jury at Sheffield Crown Court there were another four different accounts of that night, recounted by Relowicz himself in the days after Libby went missing which he delivered to police, to a friend, to a colleague and finally his formal defence in court."

This suggests there will be another version as his "formal defence in court"

Libby Squire trial - the five versions of what happened that night

 

[Cherwell]

"But Mr Wright told the jury at Sheffield Crown Court there were another four different accounts of that night, recounted by Relowicz himself in the days after Libby went missing which he delivered to police, to a friend, to a colleague and finally his formal defence in court."

This suggests there will be another version as his "formal defence in court"
Libby Squire trial - the five versions of what happened that night

Indeed - and therefore no reason to believe anything that he comes out with.

 

[Newthoughts]

"But Mr Wright told the jury at Sheffield Crown Court there were another four different accounts of that night, recounted by Relowicz himself in the days after Libby went missing which he delivered to police, to a friend, to a colleague and finally his formal defence in court."

This suggests there will be another version as his "formal defence in court"

Libby Squire trial - the five versions of what happened that night

But how will he be questioned on that unless he's pleading guilty to rape?

It needs someone legal to answer that I guess

 

[JosieJo]

But how will he be questioned on that unless he's pleading guilty to rape?

It needs someone legal to answer that I guess

I dont know ? Interested to find out

 

[JosieJo]

Indeed - and therefore no reason to believe anything that he comes out with.

Absolutely

 

[ForensicToxicologist]

In the case of Milly Dowler only partial remains were found after 6 months. There was no cause of death and no forensics at all linking her to Levi Bellfield as it took 9 years to charge him yet the jury decided beyond all reasonable doubt that he had murdered her based on other evidence presented.

In this case there is far more evidence placing PR with Libby - including her rape.

I'm interested in your opinion on the Milly Dowler case and a prosecution beyond all reasonable doubt and why the other evidence in this case is not the same when it is far stronger?

Respectfully, I am not familiar with that case or evidence so I will not comment on any comparison or why “that case had enough but this one doesn’t”. You are absolutely correct in saying that convictions can happen without a body or definitive cause of death. In those cases, prosecution relies on other evidence gathered. IMO, in this case, based solely on what we have heard the media report from court, there is not enough evidence for a murder conviction. Negligent homicide or manslaughter, sure. I admire your passion for your belief of guilt in this case. But, remember to take out any knowledge you’ve gained from WS or through your own research of the case and only look at what we’ve seen from court. Thats what the jury must do. That’s where I run into the problem of having enough evidence for no reasonable doubt. If after that, you still disagree, so be it. However, to me from a forensic standpoint that I look at in cases daily, there is currently reasonable doubt for a murder charge. I don’t think others here with that view are off base, regardless of how guilty we all feel PR is.

Everyone arguing in circles after making their point and providing their own evidence to back it up is pointless (that is an “in general” statement and not meant to single you out) as it is changing no ones opinions.

ETA we are in agreement that there is plenty of evidence linking PR to Libby and to her rape. I am only debating whether there is enough evidence for a specific charge of murder, rather than a lesser charge holding him responsible for her death.

 

[JosieJo]

"However Mr Wright says that after DNA found on Libby’s body proved a billion to one match, Relowicz’s defence will now be they had consensual sex before he left her safe on the snowy fields."

This suggests he may admit taking onto the playing fields

Libby Squire's 'obsessed murderer prowled the streets for undergraduates', court hears

 

[CoverMeCagney]

"However Mr Wright says that after DNA found on Libby’s body proved a billion to one match, Relowicz’s defence will now be they had consensual sex before he left her safe on the snowy fields."

This suggests he may admit taking onto the playing fields

Libby Squire's 'obsessed murderer prowled the streets for undergraduates', court hears

He must have admitted to that, and I suspect he pinpointed the bench - remember the night SOCO turned up with markers, took photos, then left again all within an hour? It was about half 9 at night I think. Something made them check that exact place as a matter of urgency.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

Hi all. So many thoughts after finally catching up. I apologize for writing a book on here. For the record, I believe PR is guilty of rape and causing Libby’s death. I hope he stays behind bars. With that said, I have some things to share. My opinion may not be a popular one, but I believe it’s important. It’s not meant to attack, upset, or offend anyone, so if it does, please know it’s not my intention and then “scroll and roll”.

First, in regards to some thinking he may be mentally ill and others saying no way because he couldn’t stand trial if so... He could have a mental illness AND stand trial. There is a huge difference between mentally ill and insane (which would be cause for the insanity plea where there would still be a trial but a diminished charge and sentence possibility). I have depression and anxiety so I’m technically mentally ill. However, there is absolutely no way I wouldn’t be held fully responsible for any of my actions. I would never do anything like this of course, but even if I did, I know the difference between right and wrong and would therefore stand trial as any other person would. It’s possible to be mentally ill without reduced responsibility. Addiction is a mental illness, but doesn’t reduce responsibility. For example, an alcoholic is mentally ill and needs help. But no one would argue and say “They’re an alcoholic. It’s not their fault they drove drunk and killed a family. You can’t charge them!” I believe it is the same with PR. He shows signs of a sexual addiction and psychopathic tendencies (mental illnesses) but appears fully aware of right and wrong actions which means he deserves no leniency in trial.

Now, in regards to being found guilty. I’m in forensics. I understand evidence and trials. The prosecution has used EVIDENCE TO PROVE that PR raped LS. But, at this point, with what WE have heard and seen from the trial, they have not provided evidence to PROVE beyond reasonable doubt that he murdered her. You must remember that we here at WS have had the privilege of analyzing and following this case from the beginning. We have read tons of articles. People have been amazing and sleuthed the park and river. It’s been great, and it’s the reason I truly believe he is guilty. BUT, the jurors have had no such luxury. They are only allowed to consider the evidence and testimony provided in court. Of course, we may not have seen or heard exactly everything from court that they have, so maybe there is enough. But based only on what has been reported by the media, the prosecution has not, at this time, provided enough proof beyond reasonable doubt that PR is guilty of murder. It’s easy to get caught up in our feelings and opinions and all the info we have and say he is definitely guilty. Heaven help us if courts ever allow juries to convict on “feelings” though. Remember, they can only consider what is said and shown in court. Nothing else they may have seen and heard along the way. In fact, they try to find juries with little knowledge of the case and they are instructed not to research it as it creates a bias and a reason for appeals and mistrials. So, if I was a juror, based on what we have seen from court, I would bot be willing to convict him of murder right now. I would however have zero issue finding him guilty of negligent homicide or manslaughter.

Just my opinion. Congrats if you made it to the end of this!

I don’t often read really long posts but I made it to the end of yours! Thanks for your valuable perspective on this.

Obviously there have been convictions on circumstantial rather than tangible evidence in the past, but I think many of us are unsure about the verdict on this case. Fingers crossed they are hearing a lot more in court than we know, but how does that work in reality? Can the judge slap a ban on media reporting on certain evidence and testimonies? What actually happens in the courtroom in that situation?

 

[Cherwell]

Certainly a lot of the video footage hasn't been made public, so who knows what else has been kept back.

 

[ForensicToxicologist]

I don’t often read really long posts but I made it to the end of yours! Thanks for your valuable perspective on this.

Obviously there have been convictions on circumstantial rather than tangible evidence in the past, but I think many of us are unsure about the verdict on this case. Fingers crossed they are hearing a lot more in court than we know, but how does that work in reality? Can the judge slap a ban on media reporting on certain evidence and testimonies? What actually happens in the courtroom in that situation?

Aww thanks, I’m honored lol.
Where I’m from, yes, they can. They can also instruct jurors to disregard certain pieces of evidence or testimony (stricken from the record). The MSM reporting probably comes down to the pieces the reporter finds most important. In other words, it’s slightly subjective. We’ve also seen here that they can make mistakes in their reporting. As far as in the court room, nothing really happens. If the media is silenced on it, nothing changes for the jury. If something is stricken from the record, the jury isn’t allowed to consider it in their deliberations. But of course they’re human and once something is seen or heard, it’s hard to put from one’s mind.

 

[Winterbells]

Respectfully, I am not familiar with that case or evidence so I will not comment on any comparison or why “that case had enough but this one doesn’t”. You are absolutely correct in saying that convictions can happen without a body or definitive cause of death. In those cases, prosecution relies on other evidence gathered. IMO, in this case, based solely on what we have heard the media report from court, there is not enough evidence for a murder conviction. Negligent homicide or manslaughter, sure. I admire your passion for your belief of guilt in this case. But, remember to take out any knowledge you’ve gained from WS or through your own research of the case and only look at what we’ve seen from court. Thats what the jury must do. That’s where I run into the problem of having enough evidence for no reasonable doubt. If after that, you still disagree, so be it. However, to me from a forensic standpoint that I look at in cases daily, there is currently reasonable doubt for a murder charge. I don’t think others here with that view are off base, regardless of how guilty we all feel PR is.

Everyone arguing in circles after making their point and providing their own evidence to back it up is pointless (that is an “in general” statement and not meant to single you out) as it is changing no ones opinions.

ETA we are in agreement that there is plenty of evidence linking PR to Libby and to her rape. I am only debating whether there is enough evidence for a specific charge of murder, rather than a lesser charge holding him responsible for her death.

Thankyou for explaining this so clearly.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

Aww thanks, I’m honored lol.
Where I’m from, yes, they can. They can also instruct jurors to disregard certain pieces of evidence or testimony (stricken from the record). The MSM reporting probably comes down to the pieces the reporter finds most important. In other words, it’s slightly subjective. We’ve also seen here that they can make mistakes in their reporting. As far as in the court room, nothing really happens. If the media is silenced on it, nothing changes for the jury. If something is stricken from the record, the jury isn’t allowed to consider it in their deliberations. But of course they’re human and once something is seen or heard, it’s hard to put from one’s mind.

Got it, cheers. So would the judge literally say to the media “you can’t report this bit” or do they send them out of the room? Just intrigued to know how it happens, and also how often it happens.

 

[ForensicToxicologist]

Got it, cheers. So would the judge literally say to the media “you can’t report this bit” or do they send them out of the room? Just intrigued to know how it happens, and also how often it happens.

Usually just told they can’t report, though I’m sure they could be sent out. It doesn’t happen often and would usually be done to protect someone (like a witness or innocent party) IMO. “Gag orders” which applies to an entire case aren’t rare, but individual pieces being silenced are. Things being stricken from the record aren’t rare either IMO. Something is said or shown, the opposite attorneys object, the judge sustains the objection, now it can’t be considered. In this case, I think it’s more of an issue of reporters not having the time, space, or energy to relay every little detail or minute of CCTV. The average person following the trial wouldn’t want to wade through all that when they can just read the highlights IMO

 

[CoverMeCagney]

Usually just told they can’t report, though I’m sure they could be sent out. It doesn’t happen often and would usually be done to protect someone (like a witness or innocent party) IMO. “Gag orders” which applies to an entire case aren’t rare, but individual pieces being silenced are. Things being stricken from the record aren’t rare either IMO. Something is said or shown, the opposite attorneys object, the judge sustains the objection, now it can’t be considered. In this case, I think it’s more of an issue of reporters not having the time, space, or energy to relay every little detail or minute of CCTV. The average person following the trial wouldn’t want to wade through all that when they can just read the highlights IMO

Haha, you’ve probably realised by now we’re a little bit nosier than average . We had one or two members who planned to attend the trial - damned Covid!

A couple of questions - are you in the UK, and have you considered getting verified status here due to your profession?

 

[ForensicToxicologist]

Haha, you’ve probably realised by now we’re a little bit nosier than average . We had one or two members who planned to attend the trial - damned Covid!

A couple of questions - are you in the UK, and have you considered getting verified status here due to your profession?

Haha oh I agree that websleuthers are well above average and I love it! I’m in the US. Libby’s case brought me here when it popped up in my Google news suggestions, though I have no idea why it did. I plan to get verified once my internship is over. I didn’t feel right (and don’t know if it’s even possible) doing it before then

 

[ChiCubs2016]

Welcome all new Members! Catching up tonight and it looks like several new members have come on board the last day or two! Glad to have all of you and read your thoughts!!