Discussion in 'Located Persons Discussion' started by cybervampira, Feb 2, 2019.
It is a Homicide enquiry.
I think it's very likely this is where the police are at .. I think if there were clear signs of murder on PM there would have been a charge by now
I think the desperate appeal for the Croda people was to try and find anything to disprove the suspects version of events
There might be clear signs of murder but no proof of who did it.
given the stuff in the public domain allegedly against PR, and whatever the police have that brings them to the park - could he have had a partner in crime in your opinion.
The liklihood of being picked up by one alleged pervert, left, and then meeting another in a freezing park is low.
There have been questions about where the body was found and whether it could have got there from the park.
The Croda CCTV was important.
The edited ITV footage must show more than him just getting out of his car otherwise it would probably have been shown.
I've said from the beginning I felt someone else was involved.
Where and at what point they were involved in unsure but I certainly think there is more to it.
Also don't think she entered the water at oak road never have done.
All MOO of course and I know many disagree.
I agree with you on every point. I also now wonder if they're out of the country. I slso think there's more to this
But also just my opinion.
If it was one of his polish buddies involved they could have been on a ferry out of the country as early as the next morning.
Just hope behind the scenes they still have evidence to work through and they havnt hit a brick wall.
Yes true but if so I feel it would be a murder investigation...and possibly even a charge if so ... the likeihood of it not being the man who picked her up and took her near a park with a river in it is slim
If clear signs of murder or harm on a body why would it not be a murder investigation?
I agree but they can't charge someone with murder just because it's not likely to be someone else.
They would have to have definitive proof it was him to bring charges not just the likelihood that it was him.
It's still a homicide investigation so who knows what is happening behind the scenes but it's been a long time now if they had 100% proof right now that PR was responsible for her death IMO I think charges would have come.
Maybe I phrased my earlier post incorrectly.
They are investigating as homicide which as we know covers murder, manslaughter etc..
Who knows which way they are leaning at this point? They don't have to tell us.
They are pursuing all lines of inquiry...about what happened to Libby. Meaning they are not sure. At least that is my take. He is not saying they will continue to seek the truth in the murder or homicide of Libby...but as to what happened to her. Jmo
It is a Homicide investigation. That includes murder.
I just feel with PRs alleged history there may be possible links to previous crimes in Poland and York. There may possibly br a partne. I think this is a more complex case they are pursuing. I've never bought the simple sex attack gone wrong because I think she'd have been found much earlier.
I wonder about his voyeurism charges as well. I wonder if he were possibly actively looking for victims rather than just looking. Just a wild opinion.
Or that they are sure and are gathering evidence from different lines of enquiry to build a case. PR has a list of interesting charges against him. If I were LE I'd think all the rumours about him would constitute active lines of enquiry. I'd think his internet history was a active line of enquiry. I'd think associates and friends were active lines of every l enquiry.
We really don't know what to make of that comment. It could well be it's a more complicated story of intent to abduct someone that they're interested in. Or it might not be. We don't know
I know what you mean but it is really important to stress that you can't be both. Surety comes from evidence. If you can't prove something then you are in the area of guesswork and gut instinct.
I totally understand that homicide includes murder .. but never before have I heard a uk police force declare a homicide investigation before ..if the PM found signs of foul play it would be specifically a murder inquiry
I'm not saying it cant be murder but the woolly, non specific term suggests the police do not have signs of murder on PM
This of course may change if further info comes forward
I know I must sound like a stuck record, I also desperately want justice and I very much respect others opinion but I'm very much struggling to see this any other way at the moment
I agree how can you be sure of something without evidence
I've heard of homicide investigations before in the UK.
Don't ask me to name exact cases cos I'm rubbish at remembering them but have heard it.
Anyway I'm gonna stop speculating on Libbys case till more facts are known as it really is just guessing games for all of us and I bet were all way off the mark
Enjoy reading every one else's insights though.
Jmo police may think that it makes more sense that her death was caused by another...but that gets them nowhere with proof of murder or manslaughter. A suspect is not even the point, until they can determine manner of death, and hopefully cause as well.
So if Homocide covers murder and manslaughter they must have evidence to know she was killed unlawfully either way. And no charges yet in my opinion doesn’t mean they don’t know, quite the opposite. Something is obviously taking a lot of time to piece together. They would have stated by now if they were looking for another suspect. They’d have to clear PR, they really would if they think he had no involvement in her death.