GUILTY UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, found deceased, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #26

New Posts

I came late to tragic case of Libby and last weeks trial of PR. I spent much of yesterday reading through the 'live' court reports from Hull live to get a feel for the evidential material and the strength of the case against PR on each count.

Whilst I was relieved that PR was found guilty on both counts, if I had been on the jury I would have struggled with his guilt for the murder based on the lack of conclusive post mortem evidence reported. For me it was not shown beyond all reasonable doubt that PR's actions caused serious physical harm or death to Libby or that there was evidence of the intent to do so.

In terms of an appeal, I noted that the reported directions to the jury by the judge did not specify and explain the burden of proof required for conviction as being 'beyond all reasonable doubt'. It may be than an appeal against conviction for murder is based upon mis-direction by the judge in not making this requirement clear. I have no idea if such an omission would be sufficient for such an appeal.
 
Last edited:
Skigh said:
I agree. I also think if someone is not a British citizen their own country should be charged for their prison and court costs.
Click to expand...
Well, this is quite difficult to qualify and quantify. He was paying his taxes in the UK as a resident. Just because he is a national of another country, happened to be born in Poland for example, does not mean that for a crime committed in his country of residence and work the country where he was born in should pay for his prison and court costs.jmo
 
Joolz1975 said:
Why? He is unlikely to be deported until his sentence finished anyway so why keep him any longer than needed?
Click to expand...

If he stays in the UK he will no doubt be subject to parole terms and sex offenders register. If he gets deported back to Poland will the same conditions apply? Or will he be free to commit the same offences and possible murder some other poor girl??
 
Lucy6226 said:
If he stays in the UK he will no doubt be subject to parole terms and sex offenders register. If he gets deported back to Poland will the same conditions apply? Or will he be free to commit the same offences and possible murder some other poor girl??
Click to expand...
I have no doubt on release he will offend again. I'm hoping that he won't be released after the 27 year minimum term as I think he'll still be a danger.

If he is I'm not sure what happens. Whether Poland will have a sex offenders register in place to monitor him or not I don't know. Whether he can still be deported I no longer know because all my EU friends, many of whom had been here for decades, had to apply for settled status after Brexshit. If he's done the same - can he still be deported?
 
Whitehall 1212 said:
I came late to tragic case of Libby and last weeks trial of PR. I spent much of yesterday reading through the 'live' court reports from Hull live to get a feel for the evidential material and the strength of the case against PR on each count.

Whilst I was relieved that PR was found guilty on both counts, if I had been on the jury I would have struggled with his guilt for the murder based on the lack of conclusive post mortem evidence reported. For me it was not shown beyond all reasonable doubt that PR's actions caused serious physical harm or death to Libby or that there was evidence of the intent to do so.

In terms of an appeal, I noted that the reported directions to the jury by the judge did not specify and explain the burden of proof required for conviction as being 'beyond all reasonable doubt'. It may be than an appeal against conviction for murder is based upon mis-direction by the judge in not making this requirement clear. I have no idea if such an omission would be sufficient for such an appeal.
Click to expand...
I think there was plenty of circumstantial evidence to convict BARD. CPS would not have gone for murder if there wasn't. His trial was scrupulously fair even down to a barrister specialising in defending sex offenders. I can't see grounds for appeal really
 
Whitehall 1212 said:
I would agree with that. To be denied any meaningful human interaction is a form of mental torture. I would add the caveat though. We do not know the real situation or how Maudsley presents.
Click to expand...

Well ... unless the prison guards are pedophiles, rapists or domestic abusers i think its safe to say they're not his target and its been 25 years since his last murder.

He was initially sent to Broadmoor as he was deemed unfit for trial then after the murder in Broadmoor it was decided he was sane enough to stand trial and sent to Wakefield ... makes little sense!

At one point he was moved and spent 3 years seeing a psychiatrist who said he'd made great progress and then, out of the blue was moved again and therapy stopped.

Makes little sense to me ...
 
Whitehall 1212 said:
I came late to tragic case of Libby and last weeks trial of PR. I spent much of yesterday reading through the 'live' court reports from Hull live to get a feel for the evidential material and the strength of the case against PR on each count.

Whilst I was relieved that PR was found guilty on both counts, if I had been on the jury I would have struggled with his guilt for the murder based on the lack of conclusive post mortem evidence reported. For me it was not shown beyond all reasonable doubt that PR's actions caused serious physical harm or death to Libby or that there was evidence of the intent to do so.

In terms of an appeal, I noted that the reported directions to the jury by the judge did not specify and explain the burden of proof required for conviction as being 'beyond all reasonable doubt'. It may be than an appeal against conviction for murder is based upon mis-direction by the judge in not making this requirement clear. I have no idea if such an omission would be sufficient for such an appeal.
Click to expand...

Judges have been instructed to stop using the BARD direction as juries couldn’t grasp whether that meant 51% or 100% sure.

I’ve not read back to the Judge’s directions but I’m pretty sure she used the “so that you are satisfied you are sure” phrase which was one of the recommended alternatives if I recall correctly.
 
bos said:
Judges have been instructed to stop using the BARD direction as juries couldn’t grasp whether that meant 51% or 100% sure.

I’ve not read back to the Judge’s directions but I’m pretty sure she used the “so that you are satisfied you are sure” phrase which was one of the recommended alternatives if I recall correctly.
Click to expand...

you are absolutely correct about the instruction not to use BARD. The judge did express the burden of proof as you say. I should have done my homework first. Still it's good to keep learning :)

I found this from Bond Solon, which explains the directions perfectly.

How should a Crown Court Judge direct a jury on the standard of proof in a criminal trial?
 
Joolz1975 said:
Why? He is unlikely to be deported until his sentence finished anyway so why keep him any longer than needed?
Click to expand...
It says "considered for deportation at the earliest opportunity" and then "highly unlikely he will serve any of his sentence back in Poland". So I hope that doesn't mean he'll be deported early and then released in Poland.
 
Cherwell said:
It says "considered for deportation at the earliest opportunity" and then "highly unlikely he will serve any of his sentence back in Poland". So I hope that doesn't mean he'll be deported early and then released in Poland.
Click to expand...

There are multi-national and bi-lateral agreements between many countries laying down the requirements for repatriation of foreign national offenders to their home country to serve their prison sentences.

In the case of the UK and Poland the minimum tariff for the murder with rape, in PR's case, would have attracted a 25 year sentence, as a starting point. The parole system seems to be very similar in terms of its requirements.

Parole in Poland - attorney at law Anna Sienkiewicz.

It should be noted that the neither the UK or Poland are duty bound to repatriate/receive PR. The process is lengthy (about 2 years) and certain conditions have to be met before it can be implemented. In the case of Poland, the sentence handed down in the UK would most likely be respected as part of the agreed protocols.

It's interesting to note that anecdotally, guard dogs in polish prisons are trained to go for the testicles and not the arm. This may well solve PR's 'little problem'!
 
bos said:
Judges have been instructed to stop using the BARD direction as juries couldn’t grasp whether that meant 51% or 100% sure.

I’ve not read back to the Judge’s directions but I’m pretty sure she used the “so that you are satisfied you are sure” phrase which was one of the recommended alternatives if I recall correctly.
Click to expand...

Interesting!

When I used to write up a lot of criminal appeals as a baby lawyer (freelance editing was a good job in those days as we were paid so badly as law clerks!), one would see appeals about judge's directions - the kitchen sink style approach ...

But they are pretty rare to succeed with something so basic as that as the text is boiler plate. You'd more likely have luck with something more specific to difficult questions in the case
 
Whitehall 1212 said:
In terms of an appeal, I noted that the reported directions to the jury by the judge did not specify and explain the burden of proof required for conviction as being 'beyond all reasonable doubt'. It may be than an appeal against conviction for murder is based upon mis-direction by the judge in not making this requirement clear. I have no idea if such an omission would be sufficient for such an appeal.
Click to expand...

Lots of the directions about the application of law in these cases are boiler plate. These areas have been heavily litigated down the years so there is no need for the Judge to start with a blank slate to explain key stuff like the handling of circumstantial evidence, the burden of proof, lying by the accused, inferences, etc etc

Rather boiler plate text which is accepted as the best practice will be used.

That also reduces the possibility for appeals, compared to the Judge freestyling her own directions and ensures cases are handled the same way across the country, and over the years

This also leaves the Judge free to focus on the matters at issue in the case.
 
Lestrade said:
Apologies if this is already on here but not had time to read back.

The Oak road video/s released.

The crucial CCTV footage that unveiled killer Pawel Relowicz
Click to expand...

The videos are the camera on Claremont/indicator flashes & year factory indicator flashes leaving at 00:19 which there was previously only on one source of.

Shows his car also turning right onto Beresford for 1st visit to Oak Road.

Edited to delete my mix up about McDonalds visit date
 
Last edited:
Cherwell said:
It says "considered for deportation at the earliest opportunity" and then "highly unlikely he will serve any of his sentence back in Poland". So I hope that doesn't mean he'll be deported early and then released in Poland.
Click to expand...

I read it to mean he will serve his sentence then be deported as soon as possible after.
 
Cherwell said:
It says "considered for deportation at the earliest opportunity" and then "highly unlikely he will serve any of his sentence back in Poland". So I hope that doesn't mean he'll be deported early and then released in Poland.
Click to expand...

This is referring to the policy of deporting serious offenders after they are released.

He will almost certainly be deported IMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 157 more.
Total: 3,641 (members: 158, guests: 3,483)

Online statistics

Members online
158
Guests online
3,483
Total visitors
3,641
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,409
Messages
17,968,517
Members
228,767
Latest member
Mona Lisa
Back
Top