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

[JosieJo]

I also wonder ... if the PM was inconclusive could they still initate a homicide based on circumstances..for example that she was found in the water having been picked up in a car etc

 

[Enquirer-2019]

I also wonder ... if the PM was inconclusive could they still initate a homicide based on circumstances..for example that she was found in the water having been picked up in a car etc

I have also wondered about that.

 

[Newthoughts]

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

Outside of Hull I can reassure you that people know very little. They won't have followed the case and won't know much about PR. Sadly Libby is already 'the student that went missing' and that's people I spoke to about it. Until it goes back into the national press people won't follow it.

I followed it because I have a daughter at the uni and had heard about it by the afternoon of the day she went missing. From there couldn't stop thinking about her and her parents. As long as the national press behave themselves, and, if charged he's tried outside Hull he will get a fair trial.

Your theories 1 and 2 are very plausible but why manslaughter and not murder? If PR is guilty of even some of the offences he's charged with then you can see elements of premeditation if not brains.

Theory 3 involves 2 apparently predatory offenders in the same location in the park at a ridiculous hour on a freezing cold night.

If Spidercam does show Libby being abducted (and that is likely given the source and editing) it is from a sensible place to see and grab someone. Whether that was as a result of an opportunistic sighting on your way to burgle some sex toys / masturbate or shop OR because you'd planned to snatch someone and that road is a very good place. Either way it's a good location for a sex offender. The park by the river - not so good

As well as the reduced liklihood of Libby coming across 2 offenders, the second offender that Libby would run into would be hanging around in a freezing cold park that isn't an obvious short cut at an hour where lone women wouldn't go there. Not likely at all.

Theory 4 - Libby was drunk and possibly hypothermic. The ground was frozen. The river is banked. I'd Struggle to see her running into it. Additionally when she was found the police said potential homicide. This changed to homicide on the day of the inquest. If she'd been alive when she entered the water would't it have been suspicious circumstances or unexplained?

Theory 1 and 2 yes. Could add - planned to kill someone - offending public decency is about seeing shock and fear. Whilst waiting for victims time to think and fantasise. Location of spidercam ideal place to watch out for lone students.

Theory 3 not a second offender but an accomplice. Met in the park. Though hopefully not as situation awful enough as it is. Would help with transport to Paull though. Might explain police wish to speak to 4 seen on Croda CCTV.

 

[Newthoughts]

I also wonder ... if the PM was inconclusive could they still initate a homicide based on circumstances..for example that she was found in the water having been picked up in a car etc

Wouldn't they have said suspicious circumstances?

 

[Skigh]

There must have been something that made the police say potential homicide after she was recovered.
If Libby had run away and fallen into the river they surely not have been able to say that,especially as she had been drinking.

 

[Enquirer-2019]

I have also wondered about that.

Maybe they have found some indication of inflicted injury from the initial pathology and histology investigations, but are awaiting the final tests and report to state the cause of death conclusively.

In reference also as to why no charges have yet been brought, maybe they're waiting on the 'final written pathology report' as mentioned below -

'The pathologist will provide the preliminary results of the post-mortem examination to the Coroner very quickly. However, a final written report may not be available for some time as further tests may need to be carried out and these can take time to complete.'

Abstract from the below full article ( makes for very insightful reading) -Coroners, post-mortems and inquests | nidirect

 

[JosieJo]

Ive never heard of a "suspicious circumstances" investigation..to me I read "homicide investigation" as quite open .. it could be anything from involuntary manslaughter right up to murder and anything in between..until we know the official cause of death from PM we cant say imo

As said earlier is it possible to investigate as a homicide if PM happened to be inconclusive? Based on other evidence

 

[JosieJo]

There must have been something that made the police say potential homicide after she was recovered.
If Libby had run away and fallen into the river they surely not have been able to say that,especially as she had been drinking.

I'm not saying this is what happened only that I cant see how it can be ruled out based on what we know
Unlawful act manslaughter is homicide

 

[JosieJo]

Maybe they have found some indication of inflicted injury from the initial pathology and histology investigations, but are awaiting the final tests and report to state the cause of death conclusively.

In reference also as to why no charges have yet been brought, maybe they're waiting on the 'final written pathology report' as mentioned below -

'The pathologist will provide the preliminary results of the post-mortem examination to the Coroner very quickly. However, a final written report may not be available for some time as further tests may need to be carried out and these can take time to complete.'

Abstract from the below full article ( makes for very insightful reading) -Coroners, post-mortems and inquests | nidirect

I agree I do think at the opening of the inquest they were waiting on more results from PM whether its moved on from then who knows

 

[Enquirer-2019]

Ive never heard of a "suspicious circumstances" investigation..to me I read "homicide investigation" as quite open .. it could be anything from involuntary manslaughter right up to murder and anything in between..until we know the official cause of death from PM we cant say imo

As said earlier is it possible to investigate as a homicide if PM happened to be inconclusive? Based on other evidence

I also tend to lean with @Skigh's reasoning But specifically I am thinking after the initial PM, the declaration of it now being a homicide investigation, which I am presuming they found some evidence of foul play at that point. -
From @Skigh - 'There must have been something that made the police say potential homicide after she was recovered.
If Libby had run away and fallen into the river they surely not have been able to say that,especially as she had been drinking.'

 

[JosieJo]

I also tend to lean with @Skigh's reasoning But specifically I am thinking after the initial PM, the declaration of it now being a homicide investigation, which I am presuming they found some evidence of foul play at that point. -
From @Skigh - 'There must have been something that made the police say potential homicide after she was recovered.
If Libby had run away and fallen into the river they surely not have been able to say that,especially as she had been drinking.'

I agree the likelihood is greater that the PM shows foul play in order to commence a homicide investigation..but it cant be taken as a given yet imo

 

[Skigh]

There must have been something that was obvious for the police to say potential homicide after Libby was recovered,they did need not need to give any information at this stage unless it was certain.
After the PM it was homicide so no further tests were needed to confirm this.
So in my opinion I think this rules out
Libby running away and falling in the river.
Was she wrapped in something which must mean some one else was involved?
Could it be something about clothing or lack of clothing?
An injury?

 

[cluciano63]

I think it is obvious that her case would be investgated as a “potential homicide” just from what circumstances they did know. Anytime LE finds a body in water, or just outside, they conduct such an investigation, whether they label it or not. That in itself tells us nothing.

Normally I would say the chances of encountering more than one potential perp on the same night were slim, but from what I have been reading about Hull these two months, I would not be surprised at all. I think a defense attorney could just pull reports of suspicious activity and/or arrests for any given period of time and show up in court with stacks of pages...jmo. LE would need to have substantial evidence that this was P and no one else, jmo. We are not even 100% sure that it can be proven that blurry video was him and Libby, are we?

 

[Winterbells]

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 think it's Theory 2 because I think the perpetrator, because of his hobbies or interests knew of a 'good' river-side location to take the probably unconscious Libby (in the boot or lying on the back seat of his car). I think it was at this disposal point that he killed her (outside of his car) and put her body and any other evidence into the river. I think he had time to do this before the friends had informed the police that Libby was missing, so there would have been little fear of police attention. The police were interested in activity before 3am, which suggests to me that they know what their suspect was doing after 3am but not before.
I think the reason the police are calling it 'homicide' is because the post mortem has shown an injury which would have had fatal consequences and could not have been inflicted by anything other than a human.

 

[Newthoughts]

Ive never heard of a "suspicious circumstances" investigation..to me I read "homicide investigation" as quite open .. it could be anything from involuntary manslaughter right up to murder and anything in between..until we know the official cause of death from PM we cant say imo

As said earlier is it possible to investigate as a homicide if PM happened to be inconclusive? Based on other evidence

It is very possible and right to investigate as homicide things like chasing somebody into a river. But if that were the case wouldn't you initially hear that the police are treating the death as suspicious?

 

[Newthoughts]

I think it is obvious that her case would be investgated as a “potential homicide” just from what circumstances they did know. Anytime LE finds a body in water, or just outside, they conduct such an investigation, whether they label it or not. That in itself tells us nothing.

Normally I would say the chances of encountering more than one potential perp on the same night were slim, but from what I have been reading about Hull these two months, I would not be surprised at all. I think a defense attorney could just pull reports of suspicious activity and/or arrests for any given period of time and show up in court with stacks of pages...jmo. LE would need to have substantial evidence that this was P and no one else, jmo. We are not even 100% sure that it can be proven that blurry video was him and Libby, are we?

Encountering a second perp in a freezing cold empty park far less likely. I'd say most peoplr, even dealers, would avoid that location in those circumstances.

 

[JosieJo]

It is very possible and right to investigate as homicide things like chasing somebody into a river. But if that were the case wouldn't you initially hear that the police are treating the death as suspicious?

I think its difficult to say how it would be classified...if they had found her before knowing about PR ? And previously having investigated the crime as abduction I would say yes ...but as they had already treated it as abduction I think the umbrella term of homicide more likely

 

[Enquirer-2019]

I think it's Theory 2 because I think the perpetrator, because of his hobbies or interests knew of a 'good' river-side location to take the probably unconscious Libby (in the boot or lying on the back seat of his car). I think it was at this disposal point that he killed her (outside of his car) and put her body and any other evidence into the river. I think he had time to do this before the friends had informed the police that Libby was missing, so there would have been little fear of police attention. The police were interested in activity before 3am, which suggests to me that they know what their suspect was doing after 3am but not before.
I think the reason the police are calling it 'homicide' is because the post mortem has shown an injury which would have had fatal consequences and could not have been inflicted by anything other than a human.

I am thinking along the same lines as you @Winterbells
I also think 'theory 2' to be the most probable scenario and have done since early on in this case,.

That said, I do see obstacles with proving the exact location, without expert findings or a confession.
I equally see issues without new/unseen evidence of a 'murder' charge sticking beyond a reasonable doubt, and so unless the police have findings one way or another to crack the case regarding the POI, a manslaughter charge could even prove difficult (and so can see @Woollybear 's reasoning on the likelihood of manslaughter). I pray they have got enough by now to prove that the POI did beyond reasonable doubt cause Libby's demise.

 

[Enquirer-2019]

Thank You @Woollybear for taking your own time to share with us such an excellent summary of the probable scenarios, based on what we know to date, which was very well written and easy to read.

 

[Newthoughts]

I am thinking along the same lines as you @Winterbells
I also think 'theory 2' to be the most probable scenario and have done since early on in this case,.

That said, I do see obstacles with proving the exact location, without expert findings or a confession.
I equally see issues without new/unseen evidence of a 'murder' charge sticking beyond a reasonable doubt, and so unless the police have findings one way or another to crack the case regarding the POI, a manslaughter charge could even prove difficult (and so can see @Woollybear 's reasoning on the likelihood of manslaughter). I pray they have got enough by now to prove that the POI did beyond reasonable doubt cause Libby's demise.

I think theory 2 as well, only because I think she'd have been found earlier in theory 1.

Finding locations where Libby's body entered the water would explain the amount of time it's taking. I think if PR is the POI it's possible he'd know good illegal fishing sites. But going there doesn't suggest a panicked person to me. It suggests someone who'd thought about it in advance

Against is the fact that the police's searches have focused on the local parks and oak road park in particular and the fact the current alleged POI never seems to stray far from home. So I'd assume they have something placing Libby there. The perp would have to transport a body before 3am.

Or there was an accomplice.