VERDICT WATCH UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, found deceased, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #24

[Vermont24]

So I'm not sure which window he was looking out of or if there are windows on the side of the house facing the yeast factory, but do you know for sure he had a view of both the path and the skatepark?

It's difficult to see the house with the trees in the way on google maps.

@NottReds50 is right. I walked along the path a couple of weeks ago and kept my eye on that back bedroom window.

 

[Niner]

How's the weather looking for tomorrow for the jurors to come in??

 

[Newthoughts]

It doesn't really matter we are lucky to have the evidence we have it still may not be enough

The defence doesn't have to prove anything

The prosecution have to give us enough evidence he killed her himself and put her in the river

Its the prosecution case he took her into the park .. killed her or harmed her and put her in the river dying or dead

Taking it step by step ...can I be sure he took her in the park ...I could just about go with that because screams and man in park

Can they prove the next step ...rape ...yes I'm sure he raped due to dna and the amount of evidence we have around her not being able to consent

Can they prove by their evidence he killed her ...imo I can't be sure due to pathology report ..no further evidence provided...so not sure

Can they prove he put her in river ..no evidence..pathologist report no help...no cctv ..not sure

Do his lies help ...no as could be lying around rape only
Does not believing his version help ...no as again could be just manufactured because he raped

Does his 3rd visit to Oak rd make me sure he killed her ...no because he could just have easy gone to make sure she wasn't lying on the ground somewhere and not found her or gone to collect any evidence left

Taking all the bits of evidence imo doesn't make me sure he killed her and put her in the river ...only sure he took her in park and raped her

I agree with everything you've said. If that's all we've got it's difficult but that is still more than many cases. So we have go to other evidence from his earlier and later behaviour from which the judge has said inferences can be drawn.

If we couldn't nobody could ever be convicted cos nobody would reach that level of proof. Ever.

@bos posted a brilliant article above about plausibility and probability and what to look at to determine guilt. We only realistically have two options so which is most plausible?

That .article offers considerations for most plausible which states:

"a) which explains more of the evidence"
Both your.options are explained by just the park evidence.
So behaviour before and after? Which option best explains the rest.
Return to the park - after a rape highly risky IMO. He's not an idiot.
Go out prowling again after a rape - highly risky. She's likely to be found wandering around and distressed. Police will check. They'll be out looking.
Not admitting to sex after arrest - highly risky, she's only been missing 5 days at that point. It's now likely she's not alive and still likely she'd be found. Claim you had sex and left her ok somewhere is better than not saying it and risk explaining yourself after a body has been found. @mrjitty had a term for the above but I can't find it.

"b) fits better with the fact finders beliefs and how the world usually works"
Explanation for return to the park is concern and to check she's ok. Is that likely given what we know about the way the world works. Would you reasonably expect concern from someone who's raped an extremely vulnerable person? Most of us cannot attack the vulnerable. In the real world it's unlikely someone lacking normal empathy would suddenly change to concern. So why go back?

His previous offences which have been allowed. Offences that are escalating and seem to show a liking for scaring woman. And his reasons for being out.

Pre planning shown by taking her there in the first place without obvious hesitation. The drone footage, prior visits. In the real world someone that plans even if just in theit heads, usually have an end point. The obvious end point to a crime is remove evidence - cos rape is serious..

"c) has parts that fit together coherently"
My opinion is that the above suggest the guilty option is more plausible and that that things fit together more coherently. The other option has incomplete plans, personality changes.

 

[Newthoughts]

Deleted duplicate

 

[Skigh]

How's the weather looking for tomorrow for the jurors to come in??

Sheffield (South Yorkshire) weather

Looks as if snow is forecast for Monday at the moment,although the snow forecast in some places in England today never materialised.

 

[Sooty]

Thank you @Vermont24 for taking the time on this. Much appreciated.


I must admit that I’m baffled. There seems a consensus that the rape was quick - do we know this is likely from his previous crimes? Does he not take long to ejaculate on cctv? How are we making that assumption?
I ask because, if he is ‘quick’ as a proven fact, I don’t know why he would expend all that energy and effort to carry, drag, stifle, overpower etc for that length of distance required to get her towards the river, when he could just as easily accomplish his ‘aim’ in quick fashion in the shadow of the trees at the entrance of the park or even down the track alongside the park, or as he suggests, by the green shed. He doesn’t have to cross the open ground where sound would travel better, he would be exposed to sightings and would be further away from his car should he have to make a getaway. The further away he gets, the riskier, if he is a ‘quick’ person. If he likes to take his time, that presents an issue with our timing window for making any sort of distance.
Of course if he had carefully planned this as a quick rape and murder and for some reason decided to murder with his own hands rather than with a weapon of some sort, and use the river as a means of disposal then that would make sense to travel that distance before rape. However, I cannot reconcile the rape, murder, disposal scenario with the factual information that we have - mainly because of the timing and the witnesses. He isn’t superman this guy. The photos of him in the gym are showing me that.
sorry, gone on a bit but my musings only!

 

[tedtink]

Thank you @Vermont24 for taking the time on this. Much appreciated.


I must admit that I’m baffled. There seems a consensus that the rape was quick - do we know this is likely from his previous crimes? Does he not take long to ejaculate on cctv? How are we making that assumption?
I ask because, if he is ‘quick’ as a proven fact, I don’t know why he would expend all that energy and effort to carry, drag, stifle, overpower etc for that length of distance required to get her towards the river, when he could just as easily accomplish his ‘aim’ in quick fashion in the shadow of the trees at the entrance of the park or even down the track alongside the park, or as he suggests, by the green shed. He doesn’t have to cross the open ground where sound would travel better, he would be exposed to sightings and would be further away from his car should he have to make a getaway. The further away he gets, the riskier, if he is a ‘quick’ person. If he likes to take his time, that presents an issue with our timing window for making any sort of distance.
Of course if he had carefully planned this as a quick rape and murder and for some reason decided to murder with his own hands rather than with a weapon of some sort, and use the river as a means of disposal then that would make sense to travel that distance before rape. However, I cannot reconcile the rape, murder, disposal scenario with the factual information that we have - mainly because of the timing and the witnesses. He isn’t superman this guy. The photos of him in the gym are showing me that.
sorry, gone on a bit but my musings only!

I don't want to use this as a comparison really but...........

The average clean pig carcass weight is 83kg or 13 stones. Usually carried over the shoulder.
If his job as a butcher involved moving them around, then he has plenty of strength IMO

 

[Newthoughts]

Thank you @Vermont24 for taking the time on this. Much appreciated.


I must admit that I’m baffled. There seems a consensus that the rape was quick - do we know this is likely from his previous crimes? Does he not take long to ejaculate on cctv? How are we making that assumption?
I ask because, if he is ‘quick’ as a proven fact, I don’t know why he would expend all that energy and effort to carry, drag, stifle, overpower etc for that length of distance required to get her towards the river, when he could just as easily accomplish his ‘aim’ in quick fashion in the shadow of the trees at the entrance of the park or even down the track alongside the park, or as he suggests, by the green shed. He doesn’t have to cross the open ground where sound would travel better, he would be exposed to sightings and would be further away from his car should he have to make a getaway. The further away he gets, the riskier, if he is a ‘quick’ person. If he likes to take his time, that presents an issue with our timing window for making any sort of distance.
Of course if he had carefully planned this as a quick rape and murder and for some reason decided to murder with his own hands rather than with a weapon of some sort, and use the river as a means of disposal then that would make sense to travel that distance before rape. However, I cannot reconcile the rape, murder, disposal scenario with the factual information that we have - mainly because of the timing and the witnesses. He isn’t superman this guy. The photos of him in the gym are showing me that.
sorry, gone on a bit but my musings only!

Regarding the cctv of his masturbation. It was over in seconds.

https://www-hulldailymail-co-uk.cdn...s/pawel-relowicz-stalked-second-woman-4936275

 

[Sooty]

@NottReds50 is right. I walked along the path a couple of weeks ago and kept my eye on that back bedroom window.

Using Vermont info, rather than directing this to Vermont!

So if PR had scoped the park previously carefully planning for such a serious crime he would be aware of the window too? Would he not likely have tried to avoid being in sight line on a bright moonlit night?

 

[NottReds50]

Thank you @Vermont24 for taking the time on this. Much appreciated.

He isn’t superman this guy. The photos of him in the gym are showing me that.
sorry, gone on a bit but my musings only!

I would be interested to see if there was any history of steroids. With that use you need to take testosterone, for the obvious effects steroids give you. You don't need to look like "superman" for the affects of PEDs. There is a worrying increased usage of steroids et al in young gym going men across the UK over the past 4 or 5 years.

 

[tigerowl]

Thank you @Vermont24 for taking the time on this. Much appreciated.


I must admit that I’m baffled. There seems a consensus that the rape was quick - do we know this is likely from his previous crimes? Does he not take long to ejaculate on cctv? How are we making that assumption?
I ask because, if he is ‘quick’ as a proven fact, I don’t know why he would expend all that energy and effort to carry, drag, stifle, overpower etc for that length of distance required to get her towards the river, when he could just as easily accomplish his ‘aim’ in quick fashion in the shadow of the trees at the entrance of the park or even down the track alongside the park, or as he suggests, by the green shed. He doesn’t have to cross the open ground where sound would travel better, he would be exposed to sightings and would be further away from his car should he have to make a getaway. The further away he gets, the riskier, if he is a ‘quick’ person. If he likes to take his time, that presents an issue with our timing window for making any sort of distance.
Of course if he had carefully planned this as a quick rape and murder and for some reason decided to murder with his own hands rather than with a weapon of some sort, and use the river as a means of disposal then that would make sense to travel that distance before rape. However, I cannot reconcile the rape, murder, disposal scenario with the factual information that we have - mainly because of the timing and the witnesses. He isn’t superman this guy. The photos of him in the gym are showing me that.
sorry, gone on a bit but my musings only!

I agree. It is so hard to conclusively work out. I don't think he looks particularly strong or fit.

I don't think he murdered her. But for arguments sake, let's say he did. If he did, I don't think it was pre-planned. I don't see anything in his previous MO that suggests that. But for arguments sake, let's say it was. For all the reasons you mention above it would make zero sense for him to take her into the field. He must have done it by the car. So he parks up at the most isolated spot on OR to carry it out with minimum chance of being caught. Which then leaves him with a dead body to carry all the way across the park, up the hump and through the tress and over to the river. Let's say he has lost a minute with the rape/murder. So 6.5 mins to do that and get back to his car - sustaining only one small scratch to his face and wet knees. I honestly can't see how that is possible.

Alternatively, let's say to get her closer to the river he must have frogmarched her there. We know she would have been unsteady on her feet, probably falling and stumbling. Also petrified and slow. This would have then slowed his journey to the river so much that to then carry out the rape and kill her nearer there and get her in the river means he would have to bloody fly to get back to his car and SA only has him walking fast with purpose. Again, just can't see how it is possible.

 

[bos]

Thank you. This has made me more uncertain! It seems that BARD is a very contentious subject with different schools of thought. If I have read it rightly, one school of thought believe that constructing a story using available evidence, it is acceptable to determine guilt based on the most plausible scenario. Another school of thought does not find this sufficient. A bit like on this forum really! I don't have any legal training but have been a juror twice. I would never have convicted someone on the basis of a theoretical scenario without what I would consider concrete proof. But it seems maybe I should have! From what I read it is kind of saying that if a former murderer, now released from prison, happened to be in the vicinity of a murder, in the absence of any other suspect you could say they probably did it and find them guilty?

That would be a risk of not considering ALL the evidence e.g you’d want to know what had been done to establish that there were no other suspects to consider & that “in the vicinity” was more than happening to be in the same postcode.

It’s brain hurty, there’s no denying it!

 

[Sooty]

I’m trying not to use information we don’t have like steroid use, and regular shifting of of pig carcasses.

I am 9 stones, and 5 feet 2. My husband weighs anywhere between 13 stone 5 and 14 stone. He is fit, not super fit gym bunny selfie fit, but fit, strong and very regularly active - resistance trainings, walking, running - he wouldn’t find it that easy to pick me up from the floor, dead weight, struggling or just having fun. He would definitely lose a lot of pace if he had to carry me any distance (say over 100m) and would have to take some time to recover breath and stretch out before the next physical challenge. Back to PR - He doesn’t look particularly fit in his photos MOO

 

[NottReds50]

I’m trying not to use information we don’t have like steroid use, and regular shifting of of pig carcasses. He doesn’t look particularly fit in his photos MOO

That's why i stipulated, i'd like to know, and just to reiterate, you don't need to like you're competing in Mr Universe to either be fit/strong or feel the effects of PEDs.

Edited to address your further comments. I don't disagree that lifting a significant weight would slow down an individual. But my point was purely about "looks" in a gym photo.

 

[tedtink]

I would be interested to see if there was any history of steroids. With that use you need to take testosterone, for the obvious effects steroids give you. You don't need to look like "superman" for the affects of PEDs. There is a worrying increased usage of steroids et al in young gym going men across the UK over the past 4 or 5 years.

"You don't need to look like "superman....."

I agree.
Just because he didn't look big , means his body composition was mainly muscle, which we know is heavier than fat.
14 stones seems about right for a someone who carry's a good proportion of muscle to fat ratio.
Also just because he didn't look particularly muscular in the pics, doesn't mean he wasn't as strong as an ox.
For instance being female, of athletic build, not a very high ratio of muscle, I'm also very 'strong' physically.
Do we know how tall he is?

 

[Steve2021]

Every word Pawel Relowicz said in Libby Squire murder trial

If you consider how long he was in the witness box and compare that with what's reported in this article I think the headline is a considerable exaggeration. Plus it's not hard to think of loads there's of stuff not reported here that he must have been asked about. He's meant to be getting a severe grilling. It can't have been this easy.

 

[tedtink]

If you consider how long he was in the witness box and compare that with what's reported in this article I think the headline is a considerable exaggeration. Plus it's not hard to think of loads there's of stuff not reported here that he must have been asked about. He's meant to be getting a severe grilling. It can't have been this easy.

Yes, I agree and it would have been interesting to have seen his body language and the general way he presented himself in court too.

 

[Steve2021]

Thanks just found what he said on the stand.

Mr Saxby asked whether Libby did anything that would suggest to Relowicz she liked him sexually to which he has replied “no".

Oak Road playing fields
Relowicz said he stopped the car as Libby "started making sounds like she wanted to vomit."

He said: “Once I stopped she undid her seatbelt and ran off from the car. She went about two metres [towards Oak Road] and there she fell to the ground.

“I got out of the car and approached her and helped her to get up. She was making a sound as if she would be sick. I helped her by way of grabbing hold of both of her arms and she got up. She was facing me.

So correct me if I’m wrong but is he saying he didn’t park on Oak Rd where we all think he parked.
From CCTV footage, picture and google maps it looks about right to me. IMO

Would he be able to determine she was running/had run off on seeing her move only 2m?

 

[bos]

Right, enforcing a WS ban on myself until at least 10:30am tomorrow- reading & thinking about this trial is becoming too much!

Luckily I have the choice to dip out of it unlike Libby’s family; hoping for no snow delays tomorrow & getting closer to a verdict!

 

[Steve2021]

Thanks just found what he said on the stand.

Mr Saxby asked whether Libby did anything that would suggest to Relowicz she liked him sexually to which he has replied “no".

Oak Road playing fields
Relowicz said he stopped the car as Libby "started making sounds like she wanted to vomit."

He said: “Once I stopped she undid her seatbelt and ran off from the car. She went about two metres [towards Oak Road] and there she fell to the ground.

“I got out of the car and approached her and helped her to get up. She was making a sound as if she would be sick. I helped her by way of grabbing hold of both of her arms and she got up. She was facing me.

So correct me if I’m wrong but is he saying he didn’t park on Oak Rd where we all think he parked.
From CCTV footage, picture and google maps it looks about right to me. IMO

And why did she run off?