Found Deceased UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #15 *ARREST*

Status
Not open for further replies.
Just saying that the site Miss_French has linked above ....Homicide: Murder and Manslaughter | The Crown Prosecution Service.... is worth reading in full to understand the charging in homicide. It is written in plain English and easy to follow ! Always good to learn the basics, helps to appreciate how the law works in the simplest form. x
 
I'm really not clear on the difference. I thought there had to be things like emotional provocation for manslaughter? Such as finding your partner in bed with someone else or an abusive partner - a sort of crime caused in the heat of the moment by sudden rage and loss of control? PR couldn't show that because there could not be that emotional connection? Wouldn't it be very difficult for a defence to argue PR had such an emotional connection to Libby that it pushed him to the edge and made it manslaughter? Or am I completely on the wrong track?

There must have been intent to harm otherwise she wouldn't have ended up, firstly in the park and then dead in the river. So thats got to be enough for abduction.

I know there are different degrees of murder so I don't think they'd have to show lots of planning would they?

Maybe @Happylappy101 could clarify?

Just to clarify, the loss of control doesn't have to be because of an emotional connection.

I was deliberately pushed by someone and fell. I reported it to the police and the guy was charged with, and eventually pleaded guilty to, assault. I was incredibly lucky that I only suffered minor injuries; if I'd broken my neck or smashed my skull and died it would have been charged as manslaughter. I didn't know the guy; he was with his young son so I'm sure he would have had no intention of killing me, and his 'loss of control' factor would have been he was pissed off his football team had just been beaten. (What he wouldn't have mentioned was that I potentially denied him throwing a proper punch because he'd unleashed a verbal attack on someone that I moved out of the way because it looked like becoming physical). Totally random.
 
Just to clarify, the loss of control doesn't have to be because of an emotional connection.

I was deliberately pushed by someone and fell. I reported it to the police and the guy was charged with, and eventually pleaded guilty to, assault. I was incredibly lucky that I only suffered minor injuries; if I'd broken my neck or smashed my skull and died it would have been charged as manslaughter. I didn't know the guy; he was with his young son so I'm sure he would have had no intention of killing me, and his 'loss of control' factor would have been he was pissed off his football team had just been beaten. (What he wouldn't have mentioned was that I potentially denied him throwing a proper punch because he'd unleashed a verbal attack on someone that I moved out of the way because it looked like becoming physical). Totally random.
I get that. Random attack in the heat of the moment. Probably wouldn't have attempted to hit you if he'd stopped for a few seconds to think.

I'm wondering about PR though, because he'd gotten Libby into his car and taken her somewhere with intent to cause some harm - maybe or maybe not murder. Where is the heat of the moment leading to loss of control there? Plenty of opportunity to think though what he's doing and stop and run.

I'm not doubting you by the way, I'm merely thinking how badly formulated that law is. Every rapist that intended to kill could use it. There should be something that considers prior intent or balance of power.

Is how she could have been killed a factor?. Strangulation and suffocation take minutes. Again time to cool down, assess and stop. Also disposing of a body rather than running
 
Just saying that the site Miss_French has linked above ....Homicide: Murder and Manslaughter | The Crown Prosecution Service.... is worth reading in full to understand the charging in homicide. It is written in plain English and easy to follow ! Always good to learn the basics, helps to appreciate how the law works in the simplest form. x
Interesting that it says in cases of head injury it can take up to 12 weeks to get results. Could that be what they're waiting for? And that the report is only completed once all results come through
 
I get that. Random attack in the heat of the moment. Probably wouldn't have attempted to hit you if he'd stopped for a few seconds to think.

I'm wondering about PR though, because he'd gotten Libby into his car and taken her somewhere with intent to cause some harm - maybe or maybe not murder. Where is the heat of the moment leading to loss of control there? Plenty of opportunity to think though what he's doing and stop and run.

I'm not doubting you by the way, I'm merely thinking how badly formulated that law is. Every rapist that intended to kill could use it. There should be something that considers prior intent or balance of power.

Is how she could have been killed a factor?. Strangulation and suffocation take minutes. Again time to cool down, assess and stop. Also disposing of a body rather than running

This is why until we are told more I worry about the evidence..I would have thought if there were clear signs of strangulation or a knife wound or a head injury consistent with an implement being used it would have been classified a murder enquiry
 
Thank you for the information about the difference between manslaughter and murder.
I think even if charged with murder PR will try and claim manslaughter .
I can see the police wanting to try and get every shred of evidence they can to make their case 100% watertight.

I'm another one over here in the corner who thinks that the spectre of manslaughter will haunt this prosecution, if it comes to court. The CPS would have to prove intent to kill and all that they have got at the moment is that he seems to have inveigled her into his car presumably with some sort of sexual intent, and even that is based on the assumption that the police have more of the "spidercam" footage than was released, because otherwise the defence will make hay with the bit that we've all seen. Then I would imagine that the accused's first line of defence would be that she got out of the car afterwards, or escaped during, the sexual assault and he never saw her again. The fallback position, if that is disproved in some way, would be that he'd claim the incident got out of hand and she suffered fatal harm, and he would therefore opt for a guilty plea to manslaughter which he would hope would bring a lesser sentence.

I suppose the police and CPS have the CCTV of him going in to the playing fields, and it could be that they have additional evidence from Greybeard the Good Samaritan which they are keeping up their sleeve until it comes to disclosure time, surrounding the events around the bench. He also admitted to a family member (assuming the bloke in custody is the right one) that he'd picked up "a crying girl", and given her a lift.

Other than that, there is the forensic evidence from Libby's body, which may also provide a cause of death and an indication of the time she was in the water, and that's about it. The fact that they haven't moved to bring charges yet could mean that they are waiting for more tests or that they haven't got enough, and that's that. Even if they found DNA the defence would presumably claim it was transferred during her time in his car.

I have looked at the Croda CCTV and to be honest the bloke on a bike could just be a fast food worker going home or a shift worker headed in to work - we're a 24 hour society these days - I think there's a Royal Mail facility somewhere in the area that would be 24/7. The jogger? Well, could be just a jogger. There is a type of jogging where you alternate walking and running called, unbelievably, a "fartlek". The guy could just be fartlekking. And the couple, if they are indeed a couple, could have been on their way back from a tryst of their own, which is why they haven't come forward.

It's quite a depressing vista, all told. What the case needs is something to put the accused and Libby together in the park after the fatal "event" if indeed there was one. As others have pointed out, she may even have fallen into the river in her attempt to escape.

At the moment, unless there is something we don't know, which the CPS and police are keeping quiet, it's looking like all he would have to do is sit there parroting, in questioning, "no comment".
 
Interesting that it says in cases of head injury it can take up to 12 weeks to get results. Could that be what they're waiting for? And that the report is only completed once all results come through

As unpleasant as it is, I think the conditions of a body after several weeks in aqueous environment, and a tidal one at that, must make cod extremely difficult.
 
I would think the most likely cause would be either strangulation or smothering.A knife or head injury would result in blood loss and I think forensics would have had cordens up in ORPF for a long time.

Toxicology reports can take weeks.
I would think the police would want to make sure they had every thing back that they could before they make charges. Once he is charged,
PRs defence are able to have a second PM and presumably look at the results from the first one.
 
If they have enough for manslaughter they will have enough for murder

I am doubtful that P can be charged with either, based on what we know. If he has admitted she was in his car but nothing more, how can it be proven he killed her? Especially if cause of death turns out to be uncertain or undetermined, or drowning.

Being the last person to be seen with a person is not enough to convict them of murder or manslaughter, imo. Right now...it SEEMS like that is all they have, and even that may be heresay if he has not admitted to it, and if that video is not useable. Jmo
 
I'm really not clear on the difference. I thought there had to be things like emotional provocation for manslaughter? Such as finding your partner in bed with someone else or an abusive partner - a sort of crime caused in the heat of the moment by sudden rage and loss of control? PR couldn't show that because there could not be that emotional connection? Wouldn't it be very difficult for a defence to argue PR had such an emotional connection to Libby that it pushed him to the edge and made it manslaughter? Or am I completely on the wrong track?

There must have been intent to harm otherwise she wouldn't have ended up, firstly in the park and then dead in the river. So thats got to be enough for abduction.

I know there are different degrees of murder so I don't think they'd have to show lots of planning would they?

Maybe @Happylappy101 could clarify?

Good to see everyone again :)
For loss of control (I assume you mean), they wouldn’t necessarily need to be an emotional response, but very much can be. Really, the law was changed from provocation which makes it easier to be satisfied for a non-personal stimulus to set off the loss of control. There just needs a qualifying trigger under s55 Coroners and Justice Act 1954 where’s Ds loss of self control attributable to fear of serious violence from another or thing(s) said or done (or both) which were grave in the circumstances of D and cause D to have justifiable sense of being seriously wronged (both decided objectively). Someone set out above me the ways to reduce murder to manslaughter and it’s correct. To conclude, need not have personal emotional connection (e.g. taunting may suffice), but is not discriminatory against a personal connection either.
 
I am doubtful that P can be charged with either, based on what we know. If he has admitted she was in his car but nothing more, how can it be proven he killed her? Especially if cause of death turns out to be uncertain or undetermined, or drowning.

Being the last person to be seen with a person is not enough to convict them of murder or manslaughter, imo. Right now...it SEEMS like that is all they have, and even that may be heresay if he has not admitted to it, and if that video is not useable. Jmo
A murderer is always the last person to see somebody alive though and in this case we have someone who appears to have told his sister he had contact with Libby. Close contact. We have CCTV showing her getting into his car. He is someone that we now know commits sexually deviant crimes featuring young women. We suspect the police have access to other crimes committed by him. We have a young woman who has been found dead in water. We have a police force investigating homicide not unexplained death

If we just take that alone than IMO it looks likely Libby was dead before entering the water. It looks like PR had her in his car and took her somewhere. on aa night with temperatures of -5. On that alone you'd be suspicious.

So I guess how likely is it that PR took Libby somewhere and left her unharmed to be picked up by someone else? I'd say you're close to beyond reasonable doubt he took her and he caused her harm rather then someone else.

That's without whatever forensics the police have.

In the Milly Dowler murder her remains weren't found for 6 months and there were no forensics left. Her killer wasn't brought to trial until 9 years after her murder. That allowed him to present a defence of her committing suicide. But he was convicted of her murder.

I remain hopeful he will be charged.

I don't think he'll plead guilty to anything. I thought he would have pleaded guilty to his current charges to reduce any sentence and get out of the country asap. But he hasn't which I find bizarre.

Just my opinions though
 
I am doubtful that P can be charged with either, based on what we know. If he has admitted she was in his car but nothing more, how can it be proven he killed her? Especially if cause of death turns out to be uncertain or undetermined, or drowning.

Being the last person to be seen with a person is not enough to convict them of murder or manslaughter, imo. Right now...it SEEMS like that is all they have, and even that may be heresay if he has not admitted to it, and if that video is not useable. Jmo

Totally agree
 
For me ..unless the the PM shows clearly how she died him being the last person to see her ..sexual deviant or not ...does not make a murder case

Unless the PM can show very clearly she died before entering the water and her death was violent I think they have a hard job on their hands

Also imo I dont see how we can presume he murdered her ..how can we say with 100% surety it was ? As yet based on what we know.
 
Two examples
He took her in the park start exposing himself or sexual assault..she got away from him ..ran up the clear slope towards the derelict buildings..heading for the lights of the factories...accidentally fell into river leaving no real evidence due to frozen ground

As above but she fell and injured her head ..there does not have to be blood ..he thinks she is dead panics puts her in river

Can these in reality be impossible? Based on what we know up to yet ?
 
For me ..unless the the PM shows clearly how she died him being the last person to see her ..sexual deviant or not ...does not make a murder case

Unless the PM can show very clearly she died before entering the water and her death was violent I think they have a hard job on their hands

Also imo I dont see how we can presume he murdered her ..how can we say with 100% surety it was ? As yet based on what we know.

I agree with you.

I mean my gut feeling is he murdered her but you can't build a murder case on gut feeling.

Unless they have solid forensics linking him directly to her death I think he stands a chance of getting away with it.

A good defence could run rings around any circumstantial evidence they may have.
 
For me ..unless the the PM shows clearly how she died him being the last person to see her ..sexual deviant or not ...does not make a murder case

Unless the PM can show very clearly she died before entering the water and her death was violent I think they have a hard job on their hands

Also imo I dont see how we can presume he murdered her ..how can we say with 100% surety it was ? As yet based on what we know.
If we're looking for 100% surety nobody would ever go to prison. We're looking for beyond all reasonable doubt

If she died by drowning I'd be surprised if LE would firstly say potential homicide and then homicide. Wouldn't it be suspicious circumstances or unexplained death.
 
Two examples
He took her in the park start exposing himself or sexual assault..she got away from him ..ran up the clear slope towards the derelict buildings..heading for the lights of the factories...accidentally fell into river leaving no real evidence due to frozen ground

As above but she fell and injured her head ..there does not have to be blood ..he thinks she is dead panics puts her in river

Can these in reality be impossible? Based on what we know up to yet ?
Don't both of those fall under the third definition of manslaughter? Conduct in the form of an unlawful act that caused some harm resulting in death? Taken to accept dark place near water. Threatened sexual assault.
 
In the Milly Dowler murder her remains weren't found for 6 months and there were no forensics left. Her killer wasn't brought to trial until 9 years after her murder. That allowed him to present a defence of her committing suicide. But he was convicted of her murder

If I remember correctly, didn't the breakthrough that linked Levi Bellfield to Milly Dowler come when one of his former partners (at great risk to herself and showing considerable personal courage) changed her statement and un-alibi-ed him for one of the crucial parts of the timeline? It was a while ago and I may be getting this wrong...

Maybe the police and CPS are hoping that the longer they hold off before charging the current suspect, the more they might have a chance of something similar happening with one of his friends, colleagues or family
 
Don't both of those fall under the third definition of manslaughter? Conduct in the form of an unlawful act that caused some harm resulting in death? Taken to accept dark place near water. Threatened sexual assault.


Absolutely they do .. which makes me wonder is this why it's a homicide investigation rather than a murder one
 
  • Like
Reactions: bos
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
159
Guests online
1,111
Total visitors
1,270

Forum statistics

Threads
589,939
Messages
17,927,961
Members
228,008
Latest member
redeworker
Back
Top