UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #20

[Cherwell]

Imo : This is where PR parked and this is why i think libby ran into the park. I think she realised she was in danger when he drove into the darkness of that back road. She would be in the passenger seat on the left handside. He would have had to stop there because of the bollards. Its secluded and no cars would be going down there because its a dead end. When he's stopped, Shes managed to open the door and the closest option to her would be through those gates.

View attachment 281153 View attachment 281154

This makes perfect sense and it's very frustrating that we are still having to guess this now that it's all coming out in court. I can't remember a following a trial where so much seems to be unexplained or unreported.

 

[ChiCubs2016]

That must be a mistake, Jarvis. It must be.

DMB other posters answered

 

[Winterbells]

if he raped and killed her he would be tied to her murder when his semen was discovered and her body would provide more DNA evidence of him and injuries.

(snipped by me for focus) ... But, having raped and killed Libby, could he have left her in/near the park somewhere, hoping when she was found it would appear as though (in his words) she had fallen and frozen and if semen was found, how would it link to him? his dna isn't on the police database at this point.
But, then he remembers the camera.
But which camera, I wonder? 'Beverley Road', says the reportage. Is this a mistake? Do they mean Beresford Avenue? and if so, surely whatever happened is within view of that camera.

 

[ForensicToxicologist]

*disclaimer* I have not read 25/1 trial update so my opinion on having enough evidence may change, but I wanted to answer you before I lost the posts*

Great first post. But I have to disagree with some aspects.

The verdict isn't necessarily a scientific/forensic certainty, if it was it wouldn't need to be decided by a jury of peers. And I think you may be confusing consideration of circumstantial evidence with "feelings".

That said, I think this is touch and go on the murder charge. But if I had to make a prediction now I think it will be guilty (obviously we haven't heard from the defence yet).

I certainly understand and believe in circumstantial evidence. The issue for me is when there isn’t enough of it for a direct charge. I still believe some people may be combining that with their feelings on PR that they’ve gained from info on WS. While I actually agree with them, the jury doesn’t have that info. My whole entire point is whether, as a juror, having only the info from court, I would believe there is enough evidence for murder and not a lesser charge.

Not even the first visit to the park, or the prior drone activity, third visit to the park, dragging Libby into his car if never violent to women, the bruises on Libby's body, the pathologist inability to say she definitely drowned, the inability to rule out asphixiation as a cause of death, the not going to police when Libby was reported missing.

Nope. Here’s why. The third visit to the park is a tough point for me, even assuming he murdered her (I do assume that, I’m only stating as a juror I personally wouldn’t consider the current evidence enough to convict. Not even saying they can’t). The 4 minutes in and out is a very tight time span to accomplish anything other than a brief peak in the water. Which means he likely killed her and put her in during his second visit, again, a very tight time span. There weren’t typical signs of drowning, but there also weren’t typical signs of asphyxiation. If other evidence was stronger, I’d be fine with discarding that bit and throwing a murder charge at him. Everything else you brought up is strong evidence. But it can all be tied to/explained by him raping her which they did a great job of proving.

 

[ChiCubs2016]

(snipped by me for focus) ... But, having raped and killed Libby, could he have left her in/near the park somewhere, hoping when she was found it would appear as though (in his words) she had fallen and frozen and if semen was found, how would it link to him? his dna isn't on the police database at this point.
But, then he remembers the camera.
But which camera, I wonder? 'Beverley Road', says the reportage. Is this a mistake? Do they mean Beresford Avenue? and if so, surely whatever happened is within view of that camera.

I think the same way he became a POI in the first place, from the CCTV. MOO

 

[Skigh]

This makes perfect sense and it's very frustrating that we are still having to guess this now that it's all coming out in court. I can't remember a following a trial where so much seems to be unexplained or unreported.

I agree about the reporting. Not sure if it is because of Covid restrictions and there are only a couple of junior reporters in court or whether for some reason there are reporting restrictions.

 

[Winterbells]

I think the same way he became a POI in the first place, from the CCTV. MOO

Ah. Yep. You're right.
Back to the drawing board.

 

[porkypies]

He knew that Libby would be found eventually if he just raped and left her there in the cold etc. How was he then going to explain his semen in her, her account of what really happened if she survived. If he left her alive, she would tell what happened, if he raped and killed her he would be tied to her murder when his semen was discovered and her body would provide more DNA evidence of him and injuries. If he was scared to admit his other voyeuristic crimes, there's no way he'd want people to know he was a rapist and/or murderer. His only Solution was to get rid of her body in the most obvious place (the river) and he nearly got away with it only her body turned up.

I hope the prosecution ask him your question, and will be most interested in his reply.

 

[porkypies]

Interesting point. I think he is arrogant enough to think he can lie himself out of situations, unless confronted with actual irrefutable evidence. He would have to have a story to explain his semen being found . He did seem today to try and weave what other witnesses said into his story, so must have changed bits after hearing the prosecution presenting their case last week.

I think he goes further than you think, I think he can refute the irrefutable - no problem.
I'm surprised he hasn't said it isn't his semen, or, he doesn't know how it got there.

 

[Loobyloo]

DBM as I was talking though my innumerate hat...

 

[porkypies]

(snipped by me for focus) ... But, having raped and killed Libby, could he have left her in/near the park somewhere, hoping when she was found it would appear as though (in his words) she had fallen and frozen and if semen was found, how would it link to him? his dna isn't on the police database at this point.
But, then he remembers the camera.
But which camera, I wonder? 'Beverley Road', says the reportage. Is this a mistake? Do they mean Beresford Avenue? and if so, surely whatever happened is within view of that camera.

Possibly he would realise that if he were identified and caught for his multiple previous offences, which involved his semen and DNA being left here and there, and himself committing them in plain sight of many of his victims who could identify him, then the DNA link would be made to him.
And possibly a massive urge to risk-take, part of his "problem," had him masturbating and leaving his DNA on the street in plain sight on the very night, after he had left her?
It seems that 'on the day' as it were, his need to be seen, even by cameras, is greater than his fear of being caught, and lies or silence are then only way out.

 

[Skigh]

According to the opening remarks as PR took the stand today, the younger child is now 2, so would have been one a year ago - certainly not a newborn:

Relowicz says he has two children ages four and two.
(link)​

Though as others have said, this shouldn't actually have any bearing on the case. I just wanted to clarify the fact you asked about.

Libby was reported missing Feb 1st 2019 ,so 2 years ago.

 

[Loobyloo]

Possibly he would realise that if he were identified and caught for his multiple previous offences, which involved his semen and DNA being left here and there, and himself committing them in plain sight of many of his victims who could identify him, then the DNA link would be made to him.
And possibly a massive urge to risk-take, part of his "problem," had him masturbating and leaving his DNA on the street in plain sight on the very night, after he had left her?
It seems that 'on the day' as it were, his need to be seen, even by cameras, is greater than his fear of being caught, and lies or silence are then only way out.

Yes, I hope the prosecution challenges his claims to have 'run away' from previous crime scenes to avoid being seen or confronted. Those claims are completely at odds with his actual behaviour.

 

[Winterbells]

Possibly he would realise that if he were identified and caught for his multiple previous offences, which involved his semen and DNA being left here and there, and himself committing them in plain sight of many of his victims who could identify him, then the DNA link would be made to him.
And possibly a massive urge to risk-take, part of his "problem," had him masturbating and leaving his DNA on the street in plain sight on the very night, after he had left her?
It seems that 'on the day' as it were, his need to be seen, even by cameras, is greater than his fear of being caught, and lies or silence are then only way out.

Yep....true.

 

[Loobyloo]

That might have been the trial. Defence might not call any witnesses. It's happened before

Having seen the approach taken by the defence today, it wouldn't surprise me if they have 'character witnesses' lined up, to support the picture they're trying to paint of PR as 'pervy but wouldn't hurt a fly'.

I remember reading an article early on, with his hairdresser saying what a lovely bloke he was. Can't find the exact piece now, but this round-up mentions several friends & acquaintances giving positive comments, including the hairdresser: '‘To me he was a normal, friendly, quite quiet guy.’ Also a local shopkeeper: '‘I was never scared of him or felt threatened. He would just come and buy his things then leave.'
Sister of Polish butcher arrested over disappearance of Libby Squire insists he's innocent | | Express Digest
I suspect several of these people may feature later, after PR has finished his testimony & been cross-examined.

 

[Loobyloo]

Libby was reported missing Feb 1st 2019 ,so 2 years ago.

You're right, sorry - never could do sums!
The Express Digest article I just posted on another topic mentions that the younger child was born 'in October' so would have been about 3-4 months old in Jan/Feb 2019.

ETA I've scrubbed my original post to avoid confusion.

 

[Miss_French]

For those of you mentioning bruises, this was the wording used (BBM):

"Dr Lyall also described to the jury a number of suspected bruises found around Libby's body, including on her chest, abdomen and thighs.

He also told the court there was possible bruising on her upper right arm, which "could represent gripping, but I couldn't say it was a genuine bruise".

But he again said that he had to exercise caution over the possibility that some bruises could have occurred or changed after death."

https://www-hulldailymail-co-uk.cdn...-news/libby-squire-murder-trial-death-4914118

 

[LucyRocket]

I've got a few uncertainties, which maybe you can put me straight on, there's a lot of discussion so I might have missed some of the facts.

It's been reported that PRs car was seen arriving at Oak Road with him and Libby, but only leaving with him. We don't know what that looks like do we? The only specifics I've heard is that they were both seen getting into the car on Raglan Street, and only one figure getting out of it when it returned to Raglan Street. We don't know if cameras actually caught the activity at the car on Oak Road? Is it possible then that Libby WAS put in the boot, and removed on visit #3?

Having seen the toing and froing by the bus stop, that took quite some time. Although he may not have been as aggressive there as he would have in a more secluded area, for fear of drawing too much attention. The camera is a long way from the figures at the bus stop, but when they are directly in front of the illuminated panel, the distance between their bodies and the movement in unison both in a stooped position undoubtedly looks like one tugging the other by the arm while the other is trying to pull away.

What is happening while he is sitting in his car? Is this when the 3 Romanians are knocking their car window at her? (If that happened). And also when she's trying other car doors? (If that happened). Although he says he was talking to her at that time, telling her that's not his car. But then he says he goes back to find her and she is sitting on the pavement. Perhaps that comes before the trying of car door handles?

After seeing the CCTV of the struggle between them at the bus stop, I'm now having difficulty with the short space of time for rape, murder and placement in the river (even if 2 happened simultaneously). Even if it's possible that Libby was placed in the boot until trip #3, 4 minutes surely isn't long enough to get her to the river. If 4 minutes isn't long enough to get her, unconscious, to the river and get back to the car, I also can't see how 7.5 minutes could be long enough to both get out of the car, walk nearer to the river (especially in the manner Libby was walking), have a struggle, rape and murder, place her in the river and return to the car

 

[Joolz1975]

When it gets to 2m 20s place particular attention ... my daughter videoed it playing on my phone and zoomed in with her phone and its easier to see. (The things we do!)

It's after the wall hugger crosses over and herds Libby in the opposite direction to where she going - home!

Final moments of Libby Squire as CCTV shows 'killer stalking uni student'

Thanks not seen that before! I agree with you she is resisting. On the other clip Alyce posted it looks like you can see her grab a car door handle (or to my very tired eyes it does) but not in a way that she is just randomly trying them, more in a bid to just grab onto something (I could be seeing things).

 

[Joolz1975]

I've got a few uncertainties, which maybe you can put me straight on, there's a lot of discussion so I might have missed some of the facts.

It's been reported that PRs car was seen arriving at Oak Road with him and Libby, but only leaving with him. We don't know what that looks like do we? The only specifics I've heard is that they were both seen getting into the car on Raglan Street, and only one figure getting out of it when it returned to Raglan Street. We don't know if cameras actually caught the activity at the car on Oak Road? Is it possible then that Libby WAS put in the boot, and removed on visit #3?

Having seen the toing and froing by the bus stop, that took quite some time. Although he may not have been as aggressive there as he would have in a more secluded area, for fear of drawing too much attention. The camera is a long way from the figures at the bus stop, but when they are directly in front of the illuminated panel, the distance between their bodies and the movement in unison both in a stooped position undoubtedly looks like one tugging the other by the arm while the other is trying to pull away.

What is happening while he is sitting in his car? Is this when the 3 Romanians are knocking their car window at her? (If that happened). And also when she's trying other car doors? (If that happened). Although he says he was talking to her at that time, telling her that's not his car. But then he says he goes back to find her and she is sitting on the pavement. Perhaps that comes before the trying of car door handles?

After seeing the CCTV of the struggle between them at the bus stop, I'm now having difficulty with the short space of time for rape, murder and placement in the river (even if 2 happened simultaneously). Even if it's possible that Libby was placed in the boot until trip #3, 4 minutes surely isn't long enough to get her to the river. If 4 minutes isn't long enough to get her, unconscious, to the river and get back to the car, I also can't see how 7.5 minutes could be long enough to both get out of the car, walk nearer to the river (especially in the manner Libby was walking), have a struggle, rape and murder, place her in the river and return to the car

It had crossed my mind about the boot of the car! And his car was not seized until quite a few days after so I suppose in theory he could have disposed of her anytime at a part of the river in the days following (not even on visit 3)

However I think the car will have been ripped apart for forensics and if she was in the boot they would have found traces and also they will have CCTV footage of where he was from Libby going missing to his arrest.

Sorry was just expanding on your thoughts there and rambling.

Up until hearing at trial that she went into the water at Oak Road I always thought he had driven her elsewhere.