Discussion in 'Located Persons Discussion' started by cybervampira, Feb 2, 2019.
There has been a change in the law /new charges apparantly from April 2019 regarding Voyeurism and new sentencing too.
Summary of the 13 charges
Confirmed: The full charges Pawel Relowicz will face at trial
Charge #13 is interesting due the time frame stated. Between Jan 25 2019 and Jan 28 2018. I wonder if that was one burglary or he returned multiple times. Moo
It could be the exact date was not known.So the burglary was within those dates.
Charge #12 is also interesting. It's changed from 19/1/19 to 20/1/19. I wonder if that confusion suggests a similar time to Libby's abduction - around about midnight?. Could it be CCTV that has confirmed the time more accurately? I wonder if it's CCTV from spidercam?
Just my random thoughts. Would still be interested in knowing what student events were on that night (19th) and what time they'd finish.
Did I read the trial is now December? More time for the investigation re Libby.
Sorry no it’s August!
Even with an August date it's more time. The guilty plea does seem to have increased the time he's held unconvicted.
Is anyone else puzzled by his not guilty plea? LE have said 90 witnesses and CCTV - and thats the evidence we know of. CPS have allowed the 13 charges to go through, so they must be confident.
Don't guilty pleas mean significantly reduced sentences? I thought it could reduce it by a third but would appreciate clarification on that.
So even if if he got the maximum - with say a third off plus time served plus time off for good behavior in prison - he could be out and disappeared back to Poland quite quickly.
So what could he be playing at? Could this be an attempt to see his alleged victims again?
Sometimes the defence advise guilty plea right to end, until they see extent of evidence - agree it seems overwhelming here but maybe police haven’t served it all, and they are chancing their luck.
Maybe they’re hoping for something going wrong and the trial being thrown out on a technicality - or maybe they’ll try and say unfair trial because of press and mass attention.
Excellent point there Newthoughts. I believe you are correct, it is a 3rd reduction for a guilty plea at the first possible opportunity, with less of a reduction as time goes on.
So had he pled guilty at any one of his more recent appearances, with time served which again i believe is 1.5 days off sentence for every 1 day served on remand, he would likely soon be due release and out of the way before further charges, playing it this way he is leaving himself open to more serious charges that he cant escape from. Hope that makes sense,
Basically it seems he has nothing to gain by going not guilty but potentially a lot to lose.
Its mind boggling.
The trial is being held outside Hull and therefore no real press and mass attention. And the press have behaved. The technicality bit worries me. Maybe that's why so much is being done in one sitting.
Thanks for that, it makes perfect sense.
Now it's confirmed I really am struggling to understand the not guilty plea.
Maybe he's going not guilty because he thinks he might not be found guilty for ALL the charges?
Pleading guilty early to 13 charges and getting a reduced prison time may still be more jail time then say being found guilty for 6 charges and not guilty for the rest?
That's the only reason I can think for his not guilty plea.
Perhaps if he pleads guilty it will prove he is known to be at a significant place and time frequently, which could also be relevant to another ‘ongoing investigation’. Which he might have already denied.
Not guilty could be for a few reasons imo
Hes is not guilty of all or some
Once admitting guilt he may feel that worsens his case re libby if involved
If the witnesses came forward only after seeing his face all over press his defence may feel they may be some play regards that
Just thinking out loud here ..would or could count 9 and 10 be the same incident?
I also feel no matter how far the court is from hull or how reasonable the press have been within days all the jury will know his potential connection to libby if not before
If the witnesses had given descriptions and reported the crime beforehand I can't see that being an issue.
If they came forward afterwards then don't certain things have to be satisfied - like the crime having to be similar to the reported crime? Don't the victims have to know things that aren't necessarily in the public domain and that they wouldn't ordinarily know? Certain behaviours?
CPS wouldn't have proceeded with the charges unless they were sure there was good evidence. And even if he weren't found guilty of them all and was, say for arguments sake, found guilty of half - the sentences would run concurrently so he'd still only serve the amount of time of the longest. And he'd still qualify for reductions.
I think @Oulton idea sounds very credible.
That's partly true of many cases but outside of Hull I can assure you that the Libby case isn't well known. Nor is PRs name. He will get as fair a trial as anyone else.
My biggest fear is technicality. I bet his barrister will be poring over every little procedure and form. Looks like he specialises in defending sex offenders.