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

[Ruthbullock]

Right. I must be mistaken then. I thought I'd seen him named in connection with Libby much earlier on.

The police can stop people being named by the media though, if they want to, can't they?
,

So did I

 

[Newthoughts]

I missed that. I wonder if the police witness had to give his name at the inquest, or whether he could have used the usual formula of "a 24 year old man".

And would they have given the name of a person arrested if that person had been released without any charge?

When the taxi driver and grey Beard came forward the police were quick to say they were not suspects. All they have said about PR is that he wasn't charged with abduction but with other offences. They didn't go out of their way to hide his name though. I can't remember if they said at one of the reports that he remains a person of interest.

 

[Newthoughts]

Donning my cynical hat for a moment, I wonder how hard the police tried to stop the media from releasing the bloke's name into the public domain?

It was interesting that once his name and, more pertinently, his picture was in the public domain there was a lot of chatter about how he looked like the the drawing / efit from the boxing day flashing incident that he was later charged with. And from that other interest which has either since disappeared or he has been charged with.

But I'd be surprised if the police had had him in the frame for those before his arrest cos I'm sure they'd have questioned him earlier if they had.

 

[Cherwell]

Like I said, I think people's perceptions have been coloured by the media putting his name out there so early. But they have form for this.
On the other hand, it's extremely rare for the police to name a suspect before charging them. One exception I recall was Mark Bridger who murdered April Jones. He was named by the police very early, even before he was arrested I think.

 

[bos]

Like I said, I think people's perceptions have been coloured by the media putting his name out there so early. But they have form for this.
On the other hand, it's extremely rare for the police to name a suspect before charging them. One exception I recall was Mark Bridger who murdered April Jones. He was named by the police very early, even before he was arrested I think.

I think they do that if they’re considered to be a danger to the public, otherwise it should be non-identifiable details given by police. The media haven’t been discouraged by damages pay outs for naming of suspects ; asking the Press to voluntarily adhere to decency/due process was never going to work

 

[Newthoughts]

I think they do that if they’re considered to be a danger to the public, otherwise it should be non-identifiable details given by police. The media haven’t been discouraged by damages pay outs for naming of suspects ; asking the Press to voluntarily adhere to decency/due process was never going to work

One of his bail applications was refused partly due to high risk of reoffending according to @Joelle88. But obviously that was on the charges unrelated to Libby.

Without all the details of those charges it's difficult to assess whether they posed a danger to the public or not but I guess they would have the Shana Grice case in mind (murdered by the stalker she'd reported several times) and would be taking sexually motivated crimes more seriously.

The media were their usual awful selves, pursuing relatives for comments etc, before he was charged with the unrelated offences but they appear to be behaving themselves since.

The initial Spidercam was ITV not the tabloids so I'd guess released with police's blessings and editing

 

[Newthoughts]

Like I said, I think people's perceptions have been coloured by the media putting his name out there so early. But they have form for this.
On the other hand, it's extremely rare for the police to name a suspect before charging them. One exception I recall was Mark Bridger who murdered April Jones. He was named by the police very early, even before he was arrested I think.

I'd guess the offences CPS have agreed to charge him with need good evidence so I don't think it was a perception coloured by what he'd been arrested for. I think these were things that had already been reported to LE but never cleared up. The boxing day efit looks very like him.

The police didn't actually name him in relation to Libby's abduction until the inquest. But they publicly say that the man they'd arrested on suspicion of her abduction was being charged with unrelated offences and listed those offences so it would have been very obvious who it was the following morning had the press not mentioned him. No real attempt to hide his identity.

 

[TheCasual]

Another tribute to Libby in Hull. It's a project called the Bankside Gallery. This is on Preston Road in East Hull

 

[Joolz1975]

Just an interesting point that I read yesterday. Though most may know this already ? I didn't but at 28 days after the inquest opens if no charge the coroner requests a second post mortem automatically..which would be in 2 weeks time

Yeh read that early after the inquest.

I'm.assuming once this 2nd post mortem is carried out by a totally different coroner her body will be released to the family for burial.

 

[Joolz1975]

Like I said, I think people's perceptions have been coloured by the media putting his name out there so early. But they have form for this.
On the other hand, it's extremely rare for the police to name a suspect before charging them. One exception I recall was Mark Bridger who murdered April Jones. He was named by the police very early, even before he was arrested I think.

I think Bridgers name was released so early because they were hopeful April was still alive and wanted everyone looking for him (stating obvious I know) as their overall priority was to find her.

Must have been completely heart wrenching to find her blood and other evidence of her death in his house within such a short time of her going missing.

I really believe they thought they would find April alive as they arrested him pretty quick.

 

[Cherwell]

I'd guess the offences CPS have agreed to charge him with need good evidence so I don't think it was a perception coloured by what he'd been arrested for. I think these were things that had already been reported to LE but never cleared up. The boxing day efit looks very like him.

That's not what I meant, nor what I said.
I was referring to people being under the impression that PR was named by the police in relation to Libby much earlier than he was.

 

[Woollybear]

So it seems that once again the bogeymen in all of this are in fact our wonderful media.

I'm thinking in view of that, if charges are brought against this bloke with reference to Libby, his defence lawyers will be looking at all of this online discussion and trawling it for examples of him not being likely to get a fair trial. Not so much this forum, which is by and large very measured and controlled, but there is a definite lunatic fringe out there on Facebook.

I noticed it when that young lass went missing in New Addington (to the shame of me, I now can't remember her name, but I'm old and feeble-witted these days) It turns out one of her relatives had killed her and hidden her body in the loft. I made the big mistake of simply pointing out on one of the groups on FB that posting things which implied he was definitely guilty was actually likely to enable him getting off, and you wouldn't believe the abuse I got ... "why are you defending him... you must be a paedophile as well... etc etc. " Apart come from convincing me that there should be an exam whereby people have to prove they know the difference between "their", "there" and "they're" before they are allowed a Facebook account, it also taught me to save my breath to cool my porridge, as my Granny used to say.

In the meantime, I've been having another one of my well-known talks with myself in an effort to get my ducks in a row about this case and I have come up with:

Theory 1

She was inveigled into his car under a pretext, sexually assaulted, which then turned bad and she ended up being killed. He then disposed of her body into the River Hull at ORPF. Likely outcome if proven, manslaughter.

Factors in favour of this explanation: - it is the simplest, and therefore usually the most likely. (Occam’s razor) It may tie in with the screams which were heard.

Factors against: could the body really have travelled all the way down the River Hull and into the Humber without being seen?

Theory 2

She was inveigled into his car under a pretext, sexually assaulted, which then turned bad and she ended up being killed. He then disposed of her body directly into the River Humber. Likely outcome if proven, manslaughter.

Factors in favour of this explanation: it would remove the possibility of the body being found too soon

Factors against: paucity of suitable locations along the waterfront with deep water close enough inshore. Paull has been suggested as an option for this – a “body” was seen in the Humber off Paull, but proved inconclusive. Also would have involved transporting the body across town (risky) and would have needed prior knowledge of the location.

Theory 3

She was inveigled into his car under a pretext, sexually assaulted, which then turned bad and she escaped, only to meet with someone else who also did her harm and killed her at an unknown location and disposed of her body either into the Hull or the Humber at an unknown location. Factors against: - what are the chances of two sexual predators in more or less the same location at the same time?

Theory 4.

She was inveigled into his car under a pretext, sexually assaulted, which then turned bad but she escaped, but somehow fell into the River Hull at ORPF. Under this theory, as with theory 1, there is the issue of the body having to travel all the way downstream though Hull and into the Humber. This could also tie in with the screams, though, if she was trying to summon help. Not a good thought.

Theories 1, 2, and 3 each have a variant option to them where the perpetrator stores the body for a short while, then retrieves it and disposes of it. If it was the person the police currently have in custody under unrelated charges then it would have to have been within a 5 day time window. Given the frenzy of police activity which blanketed the area following Libby’s disappearance it would have been problematic or someone to conceal and retrieve a body in that immediate area. Not so with theory 3.

I don't know why I have become so involved with this stuff. I think it's something to do with being from Hull and not wanting to think of this sort of thing happening in Hull. My Hull, of fond memory. A city where you could wander home along Hessle Road eating pattie and chips after a night in The Old Black Boy and live to fight another day. Anyhoo, real life is going to get in the way for the next few days so I'll just have to try and keep up whenever I can.

Edit* I looked it up... she was called Tia Sharp

 

[Skigh]

I have mentioned before ,not one of my friends ,family or acquaintances are even remotely interested in this case .They would be quite amazed /shocked if they knew how many hours I spend on websleuths!
I would think we here ,are probably in the minority so a fair trial is not a problem.

Out of all your options I would go for number 1,but hope murder could be proved.

 

[JosieJo]

So it seems that once again the bogeymen in all of this are in fact our wonderful media.

I'm thinking in view of that, if charges are brought against this bloke with reference to Libby, his defence lawyers will be looking at all of this online discussion and trawling it for examples of him not being likely to get a fair trial. Not so much this forum, which is by and large very measured and controlled, but there is a definite lunatic fringe out there on Facebook.

I noticed it when that young lass went missing in New Addington (to the shame of me, I now can't remember her name, but I'm old and feeble-witted these days) It turns out one of her relatives had killed her and hidden her body in the loft. I made the big mistake of simply pointing out on one of the groups on FB that posting things which implied he was definitely guilty was actually likely to enable him getting off, and you wouldn't believe the abuse I got ... "why are you defending him... you must be a paedophile as well... etc etc. " Apart come from convincing me that there should be an exam whereby people have to prove they know the difference between "their", "there" and "they're" before they are allowed a Facebook account, it also taught me to save my breath to cool my porridge, as my Granny used to say.

In the meantime, I've been having another one of my well-known talks with myself in an effort to get my ducks in a row about this case and I have come up with:

Theory 1

She was inveigled into his car under a pretext, sexually assaulted, which then turned bad and she ended up being killed. He then disposed of her body into the River Hull at ORPF. Likely outcome if proven, manslaughter.

Factors in favour of this explanation: - it is the simplest, and therefore usually the most likely. (Occam’s razor) It may tie in with the screams which were heard.

Factors against: could the body really have travelled all the way down the River Hull and into the Humber without being seen?

Theory 2

She was inveigled into his car under a pretext, sexually assaulted, which then turned bad and she ended up being killed. He then disposed of her body directly into the River Humber. Likely outcome if proven, manslaughter.

Factors in favour of this explanation: it would remove the possibility of the body being found too soon

Factors against: paucity of suitable locations along the waterfront with deep water close enough inshore. Paull has been suggested as an option for this – a “body” was seen in the Humber off Paull, but proved inconclusive. Also would have involved transporting the body across town (risky) and would have needed prior knowledge of the location.

Theory 3

She was inveigled into his car under a pretext, sexually assaulted, which then turned bad and she escaped, only to meet with someone else who also did her harm and killed her at an unknown location and disposed of her body either into the Hull or the Humber at an unknown location. Factors against: - what are the chances of two sexual predators in more or less the same location at the same time?

Theory 4.

She was inveigled into his car under a pretext, sexually assaulted, which then turned bad but she escaped, but somehow fell into the River Hull at ORPF. Under this theory, as with theory 1, there is the issue of the body having to travel all the way downstream though Hull and into the Humber. This could also tie in with the screams, though, if she was trying to summon help. Not a good thought.

Theories 1, 2, and 3 each have a variant option to them where the perpetrator stores the body for a short while, then retrieves it and disposes of it. If it was the person the police currently have in custody under unrelated charges then it would have to have been within a 5 day time window. Given the frenzy of police activity which blanketed the area following Libby’s disappearance it would have been problematic or someone to conceal and retrieve a body in that immediate area. Not so with theory 3.

I don't know why I have become so involved with this stuff. I think it's something to do with being from Hull and not wanting to think of this sort of thing happening in Hull. My Hull, of fond memory. A city where you could wander home along Hessle Road eating pattie and chips after a night in The Old Black Boy and live to fight another day. Anyhoo, real life is going to get in the way for the next few days so I'll just have to try and keep up whenever I can.

Edit* I looked it up... she was called Tia Sharp

I agree with all that you have written..for me 1 and 4 are the most likely

I do think though the charges brought against him are having a massive effect of people's thought process (naturally so) ..I try not to automatically jump to him having planned something like this and gone head first into sexual assault and murder

 

[Skigh]

If Libby ran away and fell in the river, I do not know what reasons the police could give for possible homicide when she was recovered and homicide after the PM.

 

[Miss_French]

I think they do that if they’re considered to be a danger to the public, otherwise it should be non-identifiable details given by police. The media haven’t been discouraged by damages pay outs for naming of suspects ; asking the Press to voluntarily adhere to decency/due process was never going to work

There were 2 statements from the police on 7 Feb:

'Chief Superintendent Phill Ward said: "A 24-year-old man has been arrested on suspicion of abduction in connection with the disappearance of Hull student Libby Squire. Officers made the arrest at an address in Raglan Street, Hull, last night. The man remains in our custody, assisting us with our enquires. We have not yet found Libby and doing so remains our top priority. Libby’s parents have been informed of the man’s arrest and we’re continuing to support them at this difficult time." '

Followed by:
'Detective Superintendent Matt Hutchinson is appealing to members of the media and public asking them to refrain from speculation about the name of the suspect arrested in relation to the search for Libby Squire.
He said: "This is a live investigation with multiple active lines of enquiry and any speculation as to the names of suspects or details of the case could seriously harm the investigation and our ability to find Libby. We thank the public and the media for their ongoing support and concern and ask for their continuing co-operation." '

Man arrested in connection with disappearance of Libby Squire | Humberside Police

Appeal to refrain from speculation following arrest in connection with Libby Squire | Humberside Police

 

[JosieJo]

If Libby ran away and fell in the river, I do not know what reasons the police could give for possible homicide when she was recovered and homicide after the PM.

Could unlawful act manslaughter apply in this scenario?

 

[Skigh]

If Libby ran away and fell in the river I would have thought it would be difficult to say homicide as there would be no proof any one else was involved.

 

[Cherwell]

Theory 3
She was inveigled into his car under a pretext, sexually assaulted, which then turned bad and she escaped, only to meet with someone else who also did her harm and killed her at an unknown location and disposed of her body either into the Hull or the Humber at an unknown location. Factors against: - what are the chances of two sexual predators in more or less the same location at the same time?

It can't be ruled out (at least on the small amount of information that we have).
Such things can happen, and have done.

 

[JosieJo]

If Libby ran away and fell in the river I would have thought it would be difficult to say homicide as there would be no proof any one else was involved.

From what I have read unlawful act manslaughter may apply ...it involves i think intentionally carrying out an unlawful act (not intending kill) that puts someone in danger