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

[HollyHunter9]

I suppose if he was so aware of where the cameras were, he could have easily run through the park itself, and slowed to a fast walk as he approached the exit and cameras.

Agree,this is what I think he did.

 

[Ruthbullock]

Indeed. All I am saying is that based on SA's statement(and it's the first time we heard it all so it makes much more sense) that person seen walking out of the park was almost certainly PR. We have 'established' there would be no reason for someone to be there that cold night - especially with a brisk walk as if to get out of there. Hypotheses that were mentioned before in here that it could be someone wanting their peace or whatever or enjoy the park at night would not be substantiated by the way that person was seen walking, as if to get out of there asap. So having read the statement, I am pretty convinced now of PR being guilty for murdering her. The silence after the screams indicate to me her death/dying/ being left unconscious and the fact that that man was seen walking with a purpose to get out of there without looking back could show that he knew of her fate. Jmo

There were 4 people caught in the Croda CCTV after 12.30 and before 2.00- it would be an assumption and nothing else that no one else walked in the park during that time (the CCTV is non existent there, which we know as PR and LS weren’t seen on any)- particularly the cyclist (I think it was him, not the runner) who appeared twice- so must have headed somewhere and headed back again shortly after. The last article I find that made reference to them they had never been identified.

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

I have to do jury service in April. Absolutely not looking forward to it and definitely hope it's nothing of this magnitude.

You must avoid WS then, if you get a murder case!

 

[CoverMeCagney]

It would depend where he was taking any object to and from.
I can't understand if her left Libby so close to the river it would have taken mere seconds to then put here in, why he wouldn't have just done this the first time?
Why leave her that close and have to risk going back again a further time?
If she was much further away then obviously the answer would likely be longer?

Maybe he just left her for dead the first time, before realising while he was having a nice hot bath that she could still be lying there in the freezing cold. On his return he realised she was dead and the river was an obvious means of instant disposal.

I do appreciate all this is pinned on the shed area NOT being the scene of the crime, but we only have his word that it was and I really don’t trust his word. At the point he was arrested and questioned Libby hadn’t been found and only he would know she was in the water, so he had to keep his version of events far away from the river.

 

[Cherwell]

There were 4 people caught in the Croda CCTV after 12.30 and before 2.00- it would be an assumption and nothing else that no one else walked in the park during that time (the CCTV is non existent there, which we know as PR and LS weren’t seen on any)- particularly the cyclist (I think it was him, not the runner) who appeared twice- so must have headed somewhere and headed back again shortly after. The last article I find that made reference to them they had never been identified.

I'm guessing that was an appeal for all or any of the four to come forward? If any of them did, it wouldn't have been reported.
We would only have heard about it if they had seen something relevant and it had been used as evidence in the trial.

 

[tedtink]

Maybe he just left her for dead the first time, before realising while he was having a nice hot bath that she could still be lying there in the freezing cold. On his return he realised she was dead and the river was an obvious means of instant disposal.

I do appreciate all this is pinned on the shed area NOT being the scene of the crime, but we only have his word that it was and I really don’t trust his word. At the point he was arrested and questioned Libby hadn’t been found and only he would know she was in the water, so he had to keep his version of events far away from the river.

Agree.
He had time to reflect at home between 'tommy tanking' and when he said he went back to see if she was 'laying on the ground' that was probably a statement of truth.
jmo

 

[Ruthbullock]

I think I’m being dumb (again, apologies), we know PR lied about many things (some may have glimmers of truth intertwined)- the car was parked in the same place both times, the distance to and from each place is the same. If PR had said he left LS by the river- to me that makes no difference as to the timings, they are still tight to do everything, if anything it would strengthen his argument that he left her by the river alive and she would have stumbled, fell in afterwards.

 

[Becky53]

If you were using Oak Road to turn having gone past all turnings on Beresford & you had a retching/gipping girl in the passenger seat, why wouldn’t you turn/stop at the intersection of Beresford/Oak Road which you come to first & is wider for turning? Why go along to the furthest point a vehicle can get to on Oak Rd?

I made this point the other day too - odd place to stop and either do a 10 point turn or reverse all the way back.
“Gipping” what a fabulous word for retching...

 

[Alyce]

Snipped for focus

I dont believe the green shed story one little bit. I agree he is trying to distance himself from the river.He would want to rape her as far away from those houses as possible IMO.
I still believe the timings of the screams evidenced by SA are the more accurate ones and that the 12.30 screams that the other 2 witnesses heard were the same ones with the timings slightly out (otherwise surely all of them would have heard 2 lots of scream).

I am still torn on whether he meant to kill her or whether the rape went wrong when he was trying to silence her though. But either way I think he put her in the river i dont believe she ended up there accidentally or that it was suicide.

Exactly this.

 

[Ruthbullock]

I'm guessing that was an appeal for all or any of the four to come forward? If any of them did, it wouldn't have been reported.
We would only have heard about it if they had seen something relevant and it had been used as evidence in the trial.

It was reported none came forward though which is quite telling (why report it otherwise) IMO - they appealed for witnesses previously and this became a news article as they couldn’t identify them. The key CCTV which could hold clues to Libby's homicide investigation
ETA the above link is over a month after the original appeal which was shown on every major news channel and online site available including sky and the sun.
ETA we also don’t know that the defence didn’t bring up the fact other males were wandering around during that time period alone in the vicinity. Not sure the three minutes that would have taken would warrant a type up in the daily reporting.

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

If you accept SA isn't so incompetent he can't even read the 12.14 time correctly on his phone when he awoke...it's rather difficult/impossible when he says the screams started just one minute later to say he could be mistaken and they started at 12.30 as per the Claremont witnesses. Unless he fell asleep again and woke up again without realising it?

If it was actually the correct time on phone. I have had some phone clocks that have gone a bit crazy and lost seconds. And we only have his word for immediately springing alert from sleep, hearing a sound and immediately looking at time.

And furthermore, what about the other screams later by the other witnesses?

There seemed to be an awful lot of screaming in such a small radius that night. Remember also the woman in the house on the Heathcote/Beresford junction who awoke to screams that same night. Obviously not related to this case, but shows not a rarity.

 

[MsMiniSleuth]

I think this too. He knew he had to deny setting foot in the park so he said they had sex on Oak Road to distance himself from the river scenario. In reality, he could have had approx 3 minutes to get himself and Libby up to the pond before raping her and her screaming. That went on for a couple more minutes before he then legged it back to his car.

Now, did he kill her (and personally I think she was smothered during the attack, to silence her) and throw her in the river on visit 2, or did he leave her near the bank and jog up there to put her in on visit 3?

Either or, if you question the location near the green shed, an alternative location nearer the water a) makes the timescales more credible, and b) fits better with SA’s testimony.

Did they make any mention of his footwear that night? Just thinking, if he was only by the green shed where there is a paved path, they would be less unmarked than if wading across grass and the reedy river bank with snow, slush and mud.

 

[C.greek]

There were 4 people caught in the Croda CCTV after 12.30 and before 2.00- it would be an assumption and nothing else that no one else walked in the park during that time (the CCTV is non existent there, which we know as PR and LS weren’t seen on any)- particularly the cyclist (I think it was him, not the runner) who appeared twice- so must have headed somewhere and headed back again shortly after. The last article I find that made reference to them they had never been identified.

I guess you are referring to the 4 people on the croda cctv as evidence that people were in the park. But i thought that those people were on Clough Road? If so, this is as far as i have understood by looking at the maps a through-path? The place where that man was spotted getting out of the park was nowhere near a through path.

 

[tedtink]

Did they make any mention of his footwear that night? Just thinking, if he was only by the green shed where there is a paved path, they would be less unmarked than if wading across grass and the reedy river bank with snow, slush and mud.

This would be enough for me to infer there was mud, everywhere else may have been frozen except the riverbank. Even the lake/pond was frozen solid..........

"Brian Thornton says he saw Relowicz cleaning his car on February 1.
He said: “I saw him cleaning his car mats on the pavements with a brush or washing mats. He looked up, unlocked the car, turned the engine on, cleaned the windows and was still doing the mats.
“I only saw him for seconds, I just looked as I was walking down the streets. I didn’t take any particular notice, I had no need to.”
Mr Thornton said he recognised Relowicz as a neighbour. He says: “He had a vacuum cleaner.
“There were two thoughts that came to mind: 1 - it was a bitterly cold day, not one you associate with cleaning a car. 2 - He was lucky to get his car close enough to plug the vacuum cleaner in.”
Mr Thornton has told the court he has never seen Relowicz clean his car before. He says it was around 1.30pm"

Pawel Relowicz told police he 'wanted Libby to be found' - trial

 

[CoverMeCagney]

I think I’m being dumb (again, apologies), we know PR lied about many things (some may have glimmers of truth intertwined)- the car was parked in the same place both times, the distance to and from each place is the same. If PR had said he left LS by the river- to me that makes no difference as to the timings, they are still tight to do everything, if anything it would strengthen his argument that he left her by the river alive and she would have stumbled, fell in afterwards.

Well, for starters it means he wasn’t lugging a dead body 350 metres. The start time and duration of the rape could easily match the screams SA heard. Stopped car 12:11, near pond/river 12:14, over in minutes 12:17, back in car 12:19.

I just think he had to deny being anywhere near that river because he knew that’s where she ended up.

Imagine his dismay when, having told the police he had sex with Libby on Oak Road, a witness came forward to report screaming near the pond and an alleged fleeing man. And again when Libby was found in the sea. And again when his semen was found in the post mortem.

His story changed each time the police had something new on him, and he only admitted things when he absolutely had to because there was evidence.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

I guess you are referring to the 4 people on the croda cctv as evidence that people were in the park. But i thought that those people were on Clough Road? If so, this is as far as i have understood by looking at the maps a through-path? The place where that man was spotted getting out of the park was nowhere near a through path.

No, those people were all on Oak Road, near Clough Road but coming from the direction of the park. That is not to say they were ever IN the park, they probably stuck to the paved road.

 

[ChiCubs2016]

I think I’m being dumb (again, apologies), we know PR lied about many things (some may have glimmers of truth intertwined)- the car was parked in the same place both times, the distance to and from each place is the same. If PR had said he left LS by the river- to me that makes no difference as to the timings, they are still tight to do everything, if anything it would strengthen his argument that he left her by the river alive and she would have stumbled, fell in afterwards.

I do not think anyone on the thread is dumb. We just see the scenarios differently. MOO

 

[Ruthbullock]

I guess you are referring to the 4 people on the croda cctv as evidence that people were in the park. But i thought that those people were on Clough Road? If so, this is as far as i have understood by looking at the maps a through-path? The place where that man was spotted getting out of the park was nowhere near a through path.

Yes it has been marked on a map, but as some
locals previously shared the park can also be used as a through path, it is not a dead end and the pathways lead in various directions and along the river. The point is many people keep suggesting that no one else was around so the person seen by SA must be PR even though the timings don’t really fit, this isn’t the exact truth, it’s sort of a twisted truth as four single males were seen floating around the area even later than that, who weren’t identified. There is no CCTV in the park and the oak road CCTV only really picked up car lights- it would have easily missed anyone else walking past who were walking where the far side of PRs car was (as it was out of shot).
ETA just to clarify, I don’t think if it was a random person that they attacked LS and am not suggesting that, it’s just another point that I keep thinking about

 

[HongKongPhooey]

Well, for starters it means he wasn’t lugging a dead body 350 metres. The start time and duration of the rape could easily match the screams SA heard. Stopped car 12:11, near pond/river 12:14, over in minutes 12:17, back in car 12:19.

I just think he had to deny being anywhere near that river because he knew that’s where she ended up.

Imagine his dismay when, having told the police he had sex with Libby on Oak Road, a witness came forward to report screaming near the pond and an alleged fleeing man. And again when Libby was found in the sea. And again when his semen was found in the post mortem.

His story changed each time the police had something new on him, and he only admitted things when he absolutely had to because there was evidence.

100% agree with all of this

 

[Ruthbullock]

Well, for starters it means he wasn’t lugging a dead body 350 metres. The start time and duration of the rape could easily match the screams SA heard. Stopped car 12:11, near pond/river 12:14, over in minutes 12:17, back in car 12:19.

I just think he had to deny being anywhere near that river because he knew that’s where she ended up.

Imagine his dismay when, having told the police he had sex with Libby on Oak Road, a witness came forward to report screaming near the pond and an alleged fleeing man. And again when Libby was found in the sea. And again when his semen was found in the post mortem.

His story changed each time the police had something new on him, and he only admitted things when he absolutely had to because there was evidence.

Oh I know it did, but if he attacked her by the river- how did he get her there quickly? Did she willingly go to the river, or did he carry her but she only started screaming once they arrived at the river(there’s no way he could carry someone who’s 5’7” and stop them screaming)? I’m just curious as it didn’t raise any questions to me, but it obviously does to lots of other people, so I’m now trying to imagine some of the possible thoughts being thrown around the jury room with regards that.