GUILTY UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, found deceased, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #25

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Steve2021 said:
The thing is, the punishment set for rape is not something that's come down from God or some higher authority. It's simply the tariff set by the UK government at any particular time. That neither makes the tariff right in an absolute sense, or means that it is considered right by the residents of the UK.
Click to expand...
Have a look at this. What do you think he might get?
Rape – Sentencing
 
Niner said:
No - I'm not the WS archivist - that would be @AmandaReckonwith - now SHE has the greatest files for WS!! :)

This is just a "side" hobby. I started keeping notes for cases I was following here so I knew "when" hearings & trials were going to happen - and there are quite a few, as you can tell - so I just thought I'd share my notes on each of the cases. Aren't you glad I did?! LOL! :D
And I used to be an office manager/bookkeeper, plus a Virgo - so I like things organized! :)
Click to expand...

This is really interesting! And thankyou @Dotta for asking this question as I too had wondered but hadn't yet plucked up the courage to ask (I'm quite new to WS so still trying to figure it all out) but I love what a diverse group of people there is across it, each with their own views, talents and valuable input! :)
 
Jonio said:
Hi, first time poster, long time follower of this and a couple of other UK cases.
Felt I could for the first time in this case add something to the discussion!

So cardiac arrest (basically means heart stops beating) is a mode of death, not a cause. It always has an underlying cause. As does respiratory arrest, kidney failure, liver failure, asphyxiation etc. None of these can go on a death certificate unless further information given re: a cause.

Cause of death could be myocardial infarction, stroke, cancer of X, asphyxiation due to hanging, drowning for example.

Natural causes means death due to an internal problem/illness or an infection (of which Libby had no evidence of at PM).

Unnatural cause would be due to an external factor (apart from infection) eg an accident or other trauma.
Click to expand...

Welcome Jonio! Great first post! :)
 
porkypies said:
I think 19yrs to Life, because I don't see how the rape can be separated from her death, whatever the actual cause, and the serious danger he poses (lies, planning, previous offences, remorseless).
Click to expand...
Yes, and there's nothing to mitigate.
I thought he'd already been labelled as dangerous, hence the consecutive sentencing for his previous offences. Can anyone remember what the judge said?
 
TheCasual said:
I just don't see enough evidence to convict him for murder.

The big problem for me is the timings.
Click to expand...

Me neither.

The timings worry me too, especially the cries heard first by SA then later - after PR had allegedly left the area - heard by two others and who were dismissed by the prosecution. Unless the timings rack up to substantiate that, then I would be wanting to WHY so easily ruled out.
 
It would be so interesting to be a fly on the wall with this jury. I wonder if their discussion reflects ours or is sticking on other points. I think, as others have said, it's probably the murder/manslaughter choice that is troubling for them, I can see why some might have difficulty with interpreting these definitions.

I think we all evolve (hopefully) here as we learn more and follow more cases. I can remember when I was a teenager/early 20s when I knew nothing about "domestic" violence I would see the husband saying, well I pushed her and she just happened to smash her skull on something sharp. Then after seeing that strangely, so many dead wives and girlfriends seemed to do this that they must have some sort of magnet in their heads that attracted them to sharp objects, it dawned on me that "this was not what was really happening here".

Like the so-called "rough sex" defence (that I think is supposed to be disallowed in the UK now?), that there are so many women that really love being thrown down stairs, strangled, body-slammed against a wall, so erotic, I know all my friends talk about how much we enjoy this....

What I'm trying to say is that I suppose there are stock lies that it is pretty safe to disbelieve because they are so self-serving and police recognise them very quickly because they have heard them so many times. And the police and prosecutors did decide to charge with murder here in Libby's case. And this is my main problem with PR that he does nothing but lie in a relentlessly self-serving way. So I have to side with police that this a very strong indicator that unless they come up with something that he cannot deny, PR - will - lie/deny.

Unfortunately in this case, unlike a lot of DV cases, where the body is usually found fairly quickly, there is medical evidence to contradict the lies. This is what Libby's case is missing, but I think we are expecting too much to have a clear cause of death where her body was in water for seven weeks. So we have to infer, we have to join the dots, police have joined their dots, rape, intentional assault leading to death, disposal of the victim's body in a way that benefits the accused massively. Or nearly did, PR. To me, it is hugely suggestive and very strong circumstantial evidence that her body ended up in the river. That the crime occurred and then Libby put herself in the river to me, is a huge "reach". The suicide theory to me is a non-starter, I have worked with a lot of suicidal people and I think it is incredibly unlikely.

Had Libby been found raped and dead in the park and had PR ever admitted (even in the third, fourth version of events) to the rape, but then maintained that he did not kill her, I might give a little consideration to that. But he has never stopped lying, showing the very typical psychology of this type of offender.

And he went straight home and started to destroy evidence................

And he returns to the crime scene........but no he didn't kill her, and didn't hide her body. Really?

Another thing I have learnt is to put almost no value on eye/ear witness testimony, it is incredibly unreliable, and timings can be erroneous. Violent assaults can happen much more quickly than we think. So of course they have to be considered. For what it's worth, the noises that were described as screams and that sounded "like desperation" sound like foxes to me. We will never know. Very subjective evidence.
Very few cases will give you enough evidence to put a "mental video" of the crime, second by second. It is totally unrealistic to expect this.
 
RosalindaA said:
It would be so interesting to be a fly on the wall with this jury. I wonder if their discussion reflects ours or is sticking on other points. I think, as others have said, it's probably the murder/manslaughter choice that is troubling for them, I can see why some might have difficulty with interpreting these definitions.

I think we all evolve (hopefully) here as we learn more and follow more cases. I can remember when I was a teenager/early 20s when I knew nothing about "domestic" violence I would see the husband saying, well I pushed her and she just happened to smash her skull on something sharp. Then after seeing that strangely, so many dead wives and girlfriends seemed to do this that they must have some sort of magnet in their heads that attracted them to sharp objects, it dawned on me that "this was not what was really happening here".

Like the so-called "rough sex" defence (that I think is supposed to be disallowed in the UK now?), that there are so many women that really love being thrown down stairs, strangled, body-slammed against a wall, so erotic, I know all my friends talk about how much we enjoy this....

What I'm trying to say is that I suppose there are stock lies that it is pretty safe to disbelieve because they are so self-serving and police recognise them very quickly because they have heard them so many times. And the police and prosecutors did decide to charge with murder here in Libby's case. And this is my main problem with PR that he does nothing but lie in a relentlessly self-serving way. So I have to side with police that this a very strong indicator that unless they come up with something that he cannot deny, PR - will - lie/deny.

Unfortunately in this case, unlike a lot of DV cases, where the body is usually found fairly quickly, there is medical evidence to contradict the lies. This is what Libby's case is missing, but I think we are expecting too much to have a clear cause of death where her body was in water for seven weeks. So we have to infer, we have to join the dots, police have joined their dots, rape, intentional assault leading to death, disposal of the victim's body in a way that benefits the accused massively. Or nearly did, PR. To me, it is hugely suggestive and very strong circumstantial evidence that her body ended up in the river. That the crime occurred and then Libby put herself in the river to me, is a huge "reach". The suicide theory to me is a non-starter, I have worked with a lot of suicidal people and I think it is incredibly unlikely.

Had Libby been found raped and dead in the park and had PR ever admitted (even in the third, fourth version of events) to the rape, but then maintained that he did not kill her, I might give a little consideration to that. But he has never stopped lying, showing the very typical psychology of this type of offender.

And he went straight home and started to destroy evidence................

And he returns to the crime scene........but no he didn't kill her, and didn't hide her body. Really?

Another thing I have learnt is to put almost no value on eye/ear witness testimony, it is incredibly unreliable, and timings can be erroneous. Violent assaults can happen much more quickly than we think. So of course they have to be considered. For what it's worth, the noises that were described as screams and that sounded "like desperation" sound like foxes to me. We will never know. Very subjective evidence.
Very few cases will give you enough evidence to put a "mental video" of the crime, second by second. It is totally unrealistic to expect this.
Click to expand...
I agree with all of this. I really spent time this weekend trying to read and understand UK murder vs manslaughter. I believe 100% PR raped, murdered and put Libby in the river. I went back and forth trying to figure out if during rape if PR killed her did this mean unintentional and would be considered manslaughter. I do not believed PR set out that night thinking murder. I think his crimes were escalating and Libby appeared and was the opportunity he was looking for. But just because he did not plan to rape and murder someone when he left his house does not mean he did not rape and murder Libby. He stalked her, approached her, waited for the Renault to leave before getting her in his car, took her to a dark remote spot. If he was not planning when he stalked her, he surely had a plan when her got her in the car. I do not think Libby got herself in the river because IMOO she was dead before or during the rape. PR put her in the river during the rape visit or the third visit. And everything he did after was to cover his crime. Washing his clothes, bathing, washing his car, telling his friends. All setting a stage. If all is this is manslaughter then we have to go by the law of the land. But I think he knew what he was doing as soon as he got Libby in the car. MOO
 
Did you watch the excellent Danish series 'The Investigation', Rosalinda? It's been on the past three weeks, about the Kim Wall case. I knew nothing about the case but watching each episode unfold it seems to me that case resembles this one very closely. Completely different location for the crime (or crimes) of course but the police and prosecutors in each case have had to take a very similar path, because obtaining evidence was so difficult. It's an interesting comparison. The good news is that Wall's killer was convicted - eventually.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 85 more.
Total: 1,348 (members: 86, guests: 1,262)

Online statistics

Members online
86
Guests online
1,262
Total visitors
1,348
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,783
Messages
17,958,840
Members
228,606
Latest member
wdavewong
Back
Top