Does anyone know / have any ideas why the cctv footage of LS sat on the bench at 1140 hasnt been released to the public? We have the welly cctv so why not that?Unless there is a break in the case there is really nothing to discuss at this stage.
Does anyone know / have any ideas why the cctv footage of LS sat on the bench at 1140 hasnt been released to the public? We have the welly cctv so why not that?
Forgive me if I sound naive, but is it possible that the 26th December voyeurism charge WAS actually still one of the charges on the court date, but it just wasn't listed in MSM for some reason? Or is it possible that there was actually just some sort of miscommunication within the media and he was never actually being charged for the Boxing Day offense, or was always the July one, but it was reported incorrectly in MSM? Just trying to think of reasons that it didn't appear on the list of charges in court.
What I don't understand is why if she had been in that guys car why they can't charge with abduction. Apologies if this has been said before, but they woukd have found traces of libby in there, a hair, something.. I'm starting to think this guy has had help. I'm not sure have much confidence in this investigation at all. The media also seems to have died down which is worrying if guy responsible is still out there.
Yep, reckon she was pretty much in trouble at this stage with drink and not being able to get into house. But that part of the cctv would be very interesting as it will not only show how bearded guy approached but also PR parked round corner smoking coming round and then leading her back to car, this is why he was arrested as it was probably clear it was him but if he is sticking to his story of giving her a lift it's up to police to try and find other evidence to nab him...Personally, I think probably because she was seen to be distressed. Outside the Welly, although a little drunk, she was ok.
What I don't understand is why if she had been in that guys car why they can't charge with abduction. Apologies if this has been said before, but they woukd have found traces of libby in there, a hair, something.. I'm starting to think this guy has had help. I'm not sure have much confidence in this investigation at all. The media also seems to have died down which is worrying if guy responsible is still out there.
Does anyone know / have any ideas why the cctv footage of LS sat on the bench at 1140 hasnt been released to the public? We have the welly cctv so why not that?
Possibly because it could jeopardise any future trial and they don't need to identify anyone in that cctv because they have already done so.
They will only release something that they need help with, they are not going to release footage just for the sake of it.
Does anyone know / have any ideas why the cctv footage of LS sat on the bench at 1140 hasnt been released to the public? We have the welly cctv so why not that?
What I don't understand is why if she had been in that guys car why they can't charge with abduction. Apologies if this has been said before, but they woukd have found traces of libby in there, a hair, something.. I'm starting to think this guy has had help. I'm not sure have much confidence in this investigation at all. The media also seems to have died down which is worrying if guy responsible is still out there.
Regarding PR's satnav we dont know if it was on his phone or a in car one but all in car satnavs (tomtom,garmin) log journey details, times speeds routes taken so they would know for certain if PR picked her up and where he dropped her off and even if PR deleted it its still forensically there. any IT guy on here will back me up on this. How do you think LE catch deleted material in paedo casesThe police were given the maximum time to question him which is difficult so I guess they do have something.
When he was arrested his sister claimed he had found a crying girl and offered to take her home. He'd put her address in his sat nav and then she'd come on to him and he'd pushed her away. So he's already fed his sister a pre prepared excuse to have DNA and her address in his car and possibly blood. He could be sticking to that story. That is why I think he'd planned to abduct someone and she was just unlucky. But that's my personal fear.
Excellent. It was starting to feel a bit like facewitterstrgramsnap in my own unprofessional opinion of such thingsThe thread is open again. Stay on the topic of LIBBY.
Unless there is a break in the case there is really nothing to discuss at this stage.
Regarding PR's satnav we dont know if it was on his phone or a in car one but all in car satnavs (tomtom,garmin) log journey details, times speeds routes taken so they would know for certain if PR picked her up and where he dropped her off and even if PR deleted it its still forensically there. any IT guy on here will back me up on this. How do you think LE catch deleted material in paedo cases
Yeah unfortunately this could be soHis model of car did not have built in sat nav.
If he used his phone a Tom Tom or garmin they can only get this information if they recovered the device.
He could have thrown them in a skip for all we know.
Yes and if hes guilty why didnt he clean house and get rid of all the incriminating burglary items ?Am completely split in two as am sure a lot are.
How can someone apparently so blasé with his bodily fluids then be so careful so no clues are left enough to charge him. I can't get my head around this.
Yes and if hes guilty why didnt he clean house and get rid of all the incriminating burglary items ?
And why arnt there any witnesses ? Its a busy park , the recent cctv showes theres still people milling about at 2am.
And wheres the body ?
Good points Mrjitty.You have to be careful not to deploy logical fallacies
1. He did get caught on video tape with Libby getting into his car
2. Most likely there is forensics of libby in his car
3. There probably are witnesses. We heard from some of them (potentially)
4. He was no doubt caught on CCTV
etc
Most likely the guy is simply stupid, but lucky so far.