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

Status
Not open for further replies.
No there is nothing in Dr Lyall's evidence to prove murder.

His inclusion of asphyxiation as a possible cause suggests murder as an option.
asphyxiation as a cause of death is not always caused by murder, therefore his inclusion as a possible cause can be not be interpreted as his inference that she was murdered
 
Nothing there in Dr Lyall's evidence to suggest murder. Will be interested to see what the final verdict is and what percentage of the jury went which way. If I were there I would not be budging from not guilty on the sole basis of the evidence and her cause of death being officially unexplained.

If we look at ALL of the evidence I would suggest there's enough from that report to suggest murder.
Focusing on and nit picking bits of evidence solves nothing.
 
Benches, kerbs, a rock or even a tiny pebble, as was first reported when he was questioned it also could have occurred post mortem in the river
It occurred close to or just after death and was a vertical laceration.

A don't think a tiny pebbles would do it.

Just before death precludes a kerb as she would be too far from river.

A rock would have to be the right shape and she'd have to hit it at the right angle as she entered the water.

Fist or table seemed to be his preferred options.
 
So ...

Dr Lyalls evidence does state that she's dead though.

Dead.

Dead not evidently from drowning

Dead not evidently from hypothermia.

Dead after being stalked and coerced into his car (once he'd waited 'til the coast was clear of course) driven immediately to the area he'd scoped out earlier.

Dead after being raped by a "dangerous predatory sex offender".

And it's just a coincidence that after his lying and lying and lying and lying that the dead girl ended up in the river with the "dangerous predatory sex offenders" sperm inside her vagina by complete accident that no one can fathom?
 
I appreciate this but i respectfully admit that for a laceration to be found on a body being 7 weeks in water and to be presented to the court in the pathologist's report it would have been significant. I cannot cite now the articles but forensic pathologists use lacerations on the head (mouth as well) to determine homicide or accident.
I think due to the temperature of the water the body was reasonably well preserved after that many weeks- that’s my interpretation of what was printed today. I’m not sure whether it was this thread or another where it was discussed in length about the stages of decomposition and cold water. Reading about ingrained dirt, grazes, bruises and small loss of skin on the ears and hairloss due to decomposition suggests it was limited.
 
asphyxiation as a cause of death is not always caused by murder, therefore his inclusion as a possible cause can be not be interpreted as his inference that she was murdered
Neither can it be excluded as you seem to stating.

Not quite sure how asphyxiation without any external agency is possible here tho?
 
Recap:
Mechanical asphyxia: is not excluded (tell-tale signs could not be preserved in water/time after death/decomposition)
Drowning: not prepared to say this was the likely explanation for her death (no tell-tale signs)
Hypothermia: not prepared to exclude it (but no findings)
 
We really didn’t get the whole report, the first time, did we?

How very sad to to hear it, though.


This is the thing. We don't as the public. We just rely on the court reporting by journalists, who, naturally, for brevity and time constraints give just a snapshot summary of the proceedings. I wonder if we were all actually in court each day, how many of us would have different opinions...?
 
BBM

...or a bench?

The bench was my first thought too but then I remembered that forensics wouldn’t have known about this injury way back when they were examining the bench.
The injury can be discounted as happening earlier in the evening as Dr Lyall states it happened either in the water or close to the time of death due to there being no bruising.
Edited by me-spelling
FEC8D84C-ED83-4CA8-B80E-BDC897D405E2.jpeg
 
If we look at ALL of the evidence I would suggest there's enough from that report to suggest murder.
Focusing on and nit picking bits of evidence solves nothing.

Respectfully disagree. There is not enough for me personally to conclude, beyond all reasonable doubt, he murdered her. He may well have done, but by what I have read, I would need something more compelling to make me say guilty without any shred of doubt. Suggesting is one thing, actual proof is another.
 
Recap:
Mechanical asphyxia: is not excluded (tell-tale signs could not be preserved in water/time after death/decomposition)
Drowning: not prepared to say this was the likely explanation for her death (no tell-tale signs)
Hypothermia: not prepared to exclude it (but no findings)

Therefore, the most probable explanation including all evidence, which is not for the pathologist to say of course, is that Libby died of asphyxiation. Jmo
 
I was just looking at Joanna Yeates thread, similar in quite a few ways. Here is the page when her killer was finally found guilty...

GUILTY - UK - Joanna Yeates, 25, Clifton, Bristol, 17 Dec 2010 #16

.... and look what happens immediately afterwards - a ton of inadmissible evidence that was not mentioned in court, but proving that the jury made the right decision. Would be interested to know how the two jurors who wanted not guilty felt after reading the new information.
 
Respectfully disagree. There is not enough for me personally to conclude, beyond all reasonable doubt, he murdered her. He may well have done, but by what I have read, I would need something more compelling to make me say guilty without any shred of doubt.

I am leaning in this direction as well. However, I have no doubt I could convict on rape and manslaughter. Even if they had “consensual” sex (which I don’t believe for a minute), she was clearly not in any position to give knowing consent. And even if he didn’t physically murder her and instead just left her there to wander off and drown, he had to have known she was in no state to have a good chance of surviving the elements based on the clothing she was wearing and the temperatures.
 
I think due to the temperature of the water the body was reasonably well preserved after that many weeks- that’s my interpretation of what was printed today. I’m not sure whether it was this thread or another where it was discussed in length about the stages of decomposition and cold water. Reading about ingrained dirt, grazes, bruises and small loss of skin on the ears and hairloss due to decomposition suggests it was limited.

But Dr Lyall has also previously stated that the level of decomposition to the body made the post-mortem harder.
64506284-E6A5-4172-9464-3E5C26CB058F.jpeg
 
It's interesting when you read the statement the judge read out that there appears to be no bias whatsoever towards what may or may not have caused her death from the pathologist.

In some peoples interpretation of what was reported in HDM at the time of him giving testimony there was some belief that he was leaning towards a particular cause - but that doesn't come across to me in the info that has just been provided.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
140
Guests online
2,467
Total visitors
2,607

Forum statistics

Threads
590,021
Messages
17,929,093
Members
228,039
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top