UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23

[Loobyloo]

<snipped for focus>
One of the reason I was asking is that I recall it being posted somewhere early on in the trail that a jury member had asked about manslaughter. I can't now find that quote, but it was during the first day or two of the trial and was reported as an explanation for a short delay. If that is the case, that a juror had asked, then it may already be in their minds, so I would hope that the judge would provide direction on that. I guess we'll know tomorrow.

I can't find that, either. It's not in the account of the opening day as far as I can see. There is mention of a short delay, but it's explained differently:

A slight delay in proceedings
Relowicz has been led away from the dock and Mrs Justice Lambert has risen after an issue with the necessary people being in the court room. They will return once the matter has been resolved.​

(quoted in @jamjim's updates here - but I can't find it on the linked HDM page.)
Perhaps we just speculated that it was something the jury might ask about?

(edited to snip the opening quote)

 

[Jarvis1969]

@Jarvis1969
It means these 2 posts follow each other. I’ve bolded the bit in the preceding post that @Skigh then references





eta: If your initial query was which trial participant said this, none as far as I know - it appears to be a scenario from Steve2021

Thank you for this, I couldnt find it, you have explained it well

 

[Jarvis1969]

@Jarvis1969
It means these 2 posts follow each other. I’ve bolded the bit in the preceding post that @Skigh then references





eta: If your initial query was which trial participant said this, none as far as I know - it appears to be a scenario from Steve2021

Thank you for this, I couldnt find it, you have explained it well

 

[Miss_French]

There was no screaming at 12.15- he awoke to a text at 12.14 and a minute or two later he heard a scream (one). He then heard 30 seconds to a minute later another scream and this continues intermittently (so not every minute or so) for the next four to seven minutes. Five minutes after 12.14 PR was in his car and driving away. Most people making a statement about screaming may put a word to describe length of time, but SA was very specific with his timings., he had to correct the prosecution when they questioned him- that says a lot about his confidence in his statement (SA is adamant it is accurate timings, which do not coincide with PR still being there)
ETA: potentially PR missed two screams spread a minute to so apart (which as was also stated by the same witness, quite common in that area)- even SA didn’t think anything of it until days after LS was reported missing.

No, SA says he doesn't know what woke him, then he checked a text on his phone. The text could have arrived any time after he'd gone to sleep.

 

[Niner]

Wednesday, Feb. 3rd:
*Trial continues (Day 13) (@ 10:30am UK) – UK – Liberty “Libby” Anna Squire (21) (last seen Jan. 31, 2019 outside Welly Club in Hull; found Mar. 20, 2019 from Grimsby Docks in the Humber Estuary) - *Pawel P. Relowicz (24/now 25) arrested (Feb. 6, 2019 on suspicion of abduction) officially charged (Oct. 30, 2019) with murder & rape. No plea entered yet. Not guilty plea entered on Jan. 12, 2021.
Trial began on Jan. 12, 2021. Trial will be in Sheffield. Richard Wright QC will lead, Mr. Woolfall prosecutor. Oliver Saxby QC for defense. Trial expected to last 6 weeks. Jury: 5 men & 7 women.
Was originally charged (18/3/19 & 10/5/19) with 5 counts of burglary, 4 counts of voyeurism, 3 counts of outraging public decency & 1 count of receiving stolen goods. On Aug. 12, 2019 plead guilty to 9 charges including voyeurism (4 counts), outraging public decency (2 counts) & burglary (3 counts). Relowicz jailed for 8½ years.
Trial Day 1-12 (12/1/21 - 1/2/21) reference post #15 here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Feb. 2nd Tuesday: The trial will not sit today because of snow. There haS been heavy snowfall in Sheffield where the trial is taking place. A number of jurors have not been able to make it in today. Trial continues tomorrow, Wednesday, 3/2/21 & it will be the turn of the defence team to deliver its closing speech before the judge sums up the case to the jury.

 

[Chambo1994]

Snow is much clearer up in Sheffield today, so should be fine to go ahead, rain has washed a lot of it away and roads were fine this morning.

I wonder with the gap in proceedings if the prosecution may get another quick run through before the Defence summing up? It does seem a bit unfair that the Defence are going to be putting their closing case forward almost 4 days after the prosecution.

As humans we have a tendency to keep the most recent things we’ve heard at the forefront of our decision making, which could have an effect on areas of the case when the jury retire!

 

[Ruthbullock]

Snow is much clearer up in Sheffield today, so should be fine to go ahead, rain has washed a lot of it away and roads were fine this morning.

I wonder with the gap in proceedings if the prosecution may get another quick run through before the Defence summing up? It does seem a bit unfair that the Defence are going to be putting their closing case forward almost 4 days after the prosecution.

As humans we have a tendency to keep the most recent things we’ve heard at the forefront of our decision making, which could have an effect on areas of the case when the jury retire!

I think the jury will be reminded of both in the judges summing up

 

[HollyHunter9]

Morning all, only now catching up. I just wanted to put forward something I thought of with regards to the post about there being no internet searches after the event (apologies I forget who initially mentioned this). If we look at from the point of view of 'innocence'...he's had a casual one night stand, then next day it's all over local news media that that girl you did this with is now missing! If you were genuinely innocent would this not peek your curiosity slightly? Who was she? What might have happened to her? Would you get the blame? I'm not trying to be confrontational or start a debate but just wanted to put forth another viewpoint that I think the lack of internet searches are equally as damning. He was very clearly forensically aware.

1. He knew where most of the CCTV in the area was located
2. Took her to an area where there was no CCTV directly within the park
3. Washed his clothes and had a bath
4. According to neighbours witness statement washed his car
5. Left his phone at home ~ this for me shows he knows how police use phone data to track criminals would he not then use that same knowledge to make sure he searched nothing to do with the crime knowing that would be one of the first things the police look at with a suspect.
6. Then of course IF he is guilty putting her in the river in his mind would most likely wash away DNA evidence.

 

[Dotta]

Morning all, only now catching up. I just wanted to put forward something I thought of with regards to the post about there being no internet searches after the event (apologies I forget who initially mentioned this). If we look at from the point of view of 'innocence'...he's had a casual one night stand, then next day it's all over local news media that that girl you did this with is now missing! If you were genuinely innocent would this not peek your curiosity slightly? Who was she? What might have happened to her? Would you get the blame? I'm not trying to be confrontational or start a debate but just wanted to put forth another viewpoint that I think the lack of internet searches are equally as damning. He was very clearly forensically aware.

1. He knew where most of the CCTV in the area was located
2. Took her to an area where there was no CCTV directly within the park
3. Washed his clothes and had a bath
4. According to neighbours witness statement washed his car
5. Left his phone at home ~ this for me shows he knows how police use phone data to track criminals would he not then use that same knowledge to make sure he searched nothing to do with the crime knowing that would be one of the first things the police look at with a suspect.
6. Then of course IF he is guilty putting her in the river in his mind would most likely wash away DNA evidence.

Re PR google searches - So whatever he did or didn't do he is guilty according to this post. He searched - Guilty. He didn't search - Guilty as well.

 

[HollyHunter9]

Re PR google searches - So whatever he did or didn't do he is guilty according to this post. He searched - Guilty. He didn't search - Guilty as well.

Well like I said, I wasn't trying to be confrontational. I was in agreement with some of the other posters that it does seem odd to not do any internet searches like other rapists/murderers may have done but then after thinking about it, it could be seen as another manipulation by PR if he was aware the police would look at his phone data (leaving his phone at home would indicate this). I do not think the jury have an easy task on their hands as there is no direct physical evidence of the actual murder (only rape) but looking at the whole picture, his many lies and mountain of other evidence it's very difficult to believe he did not do it. All just my opinion.

 

[Dotta]

Well like I said, I wasn't trying to be confrontational. I was in agreement with some of the other posters that it does seem odd to not do any internet searches like other rapists/murderers may have done but then after thinking about it, it could be seen as another manipulation by PR if he was aware the police would look at his phone data (leaving his phone at home would indicate this). I do not think the jury have an easy task on their hands as there is no direct physical evidence of the actual murder (only rape) but looking at the whole picture, his many lies and mountain of other evidence it's very difficult to believe he did not do it. All just my opinion.

Sorry I just couldn't help myself - I certainty don't mean to offend.

 

[jamjim]

09:57
Trial due to resume this morning
The trial is expected to restart at 10.30am this morning following yesterday’s postponement due to the snow.

We are expecting to hear the defence’s closing arguments, as well as some of the summing up of the case.

Libby Squire murder trial live updates: Defence give closing speech

 

[HollyHunter9]

Sorry I just couldn't help myself - I certainty don't mean to offend.

It's ok, I can see what you meant which why I think the Jury will struggle too.

 

[Newthoughts]

Morning all, only now catching up. I just wanted to put forward something I thought of with regards to the post about there being no internet searches after the event (apologies I forget who initially mentioned this). If we look at from the point of view of 'innocence'...he's had a casual one night stand, then next day it's all over local news media that that girl you did this with is now missing! If you were genuinely innocent would this not peek your curiosity slightly? Who was she? What might have happened to her? Would you get the blame? I'm not trying to be confrontational or start a debate but just wanted to put forth another viewpoint that I think the lack of internet searches are equally as damning. He was very clearly forensically aware.

1. He knew where most of the CCTV in the area was located
2. Took her to an area where there was no CCTV directly within the park
3. Washed his clothes and had a bath
4. According to neighbours witness statement washed his car
5. Left his phone at home ~ this for me shows he knows how police use phone data to track criminals would he not then use that same knowledge to make sure he searched nothing to do with the crime knowing that would be one of the first things the police look at with a suspect.
6. Then of course IF he is guilty putting her in the river in his mind would most likely wash away DNA evidence.

I would say the first thing I'd do is check the girl wasn't the same one

Re research:
I agree he was very camera savvy. Thank God for spidercam

He went to the park earlier that evening.

He went straight thru the park after picking her up. The prosecution pointed out no hesitations. You'd expect some hesitations if you were taking someone incoherent home.

He has drone footage of the park. Doesn't that count?

It is very reasonable to think putting someone in water will wash away DNA evidence. Really don't think he'd need to google that. Nor would he need to google that the park had a river or even where that river went.

His phone! My friend was a jurer on a strange stolen treasure case (not as weird as it sounds they were metal detectorists that sold instead of reporting a significant find). Most of that evidence was based on phone pings. In fact literally all of it

Anyone that has watched 5 minutes TV would pick that up and would anyone with small baby really go out without a phone?

 

[jamjim]

10:36
Day 13 of the trial is beginning

Justice Lambert is now sitting and Relowicz is in the dock.

The jury has been called up to the courtroom.

Libby Squire murder trial live updates: Defence give closing speech

 

[lo so]

That he didn't investigate whether his actions could be construed as rape may suggest there was no doubt in his mind over whether it was or wasn't. Given I think we all believe it patently obvious it was rape I was suggesting it was obvious to him too, and because it was obvious to him there was no need for him to check it out.

Just catching up. Although it is obvious to (hopefully) most people that it was rape, there are actually a worrying amount of people who would view it differently. If she instigated it, it wasn't rape (he claims it was her actions that lead to them having sex, getting the comment out to his friend early on about her removing her knickers would fit with this). She chose to be there, so it wasn't rape (assuming she got into the car without the struggle many of us believe happened). If it wasn't violent, it wasn't rape (only he knows how violent it was, but I suspect the actual rape wasn't violent, or wasn't supposed to be violent). I think his violence came as a result of her scratching his face as that mean there was evidence he'd have to explain. There was a comment made when he was on the stand about him being angry after he'd been scratched.

Just to add, I've never had any doubt that it was rape, but the above mentioned excuses are things I've heard from other people when rape was discussed. MOO

 

[jamjim]

10:41
Defence barrister Oliver Saxby closing the defence case

He has told the jury: “If the day before yesterday’s closing address was a matter of sitting back and listening and being reassured there was no need to consider the detail, being carried along on a wave that gathered momentum and crashed through everything gathered, including the evidence from Durkin and Brewster.

“I’m going to leave you to do some work, some thinking, some analysing. This case isn’t about guess work or intuition, or hunches, or theories, or common sense masquerading as the above, or about revulsion about Pawel Relowicz’s admitted behaviour.

“The case is about the evidence and your analysis of it. Back when the case began you took an oath. That was to try the case on the evidence. Adopting a theory, going on a hunch, making assumptions, pretending you’re using common sense when you’re acting on a sixth sense - these are not the basis you said you would try Pawel Relowicz. These are all poor substitutes for taking on the burden of your role.”

Libby Squire murder trial live updates: Defence give closing speech

 

[ChiCubs2016]

Re PR google searches - So whatever he did or didn't do he is guilty according to this post. He searched - Guilty. He didn't search - Guilty as well.

IMO I honestly think PR only searched . MOO

 

[jamjim]

10:47
Relowicz 'lied and lied' - but that does not mean he is guilty, defence says

Mr Saxby says he will examine the evidence over the next few hours which is “what all those connected with the case deserve.”

He says he will look at the relevant evidence, the prosecution theories and what the evidence actually establishes and does not establish.

Mr Saxby said: “The reality number one is that Pawel Relowicz has lied and lied and lied to himself, his wife, the police and in court documents. There is no doubt guilty people lie - to get away with it - but lying is not the exclusive preserve of the guilty.

“Sometimes, those who are not lie. They lie because they’re scared and worry they won’t be believed because they’re young or naive and they don’t recognise the significance of lying and the jeopardy that may face them because they don’t want to admit something they have done despite raising suspicion.”

Libby Squire murder trial live updates: Defence give closing speech

 

[jamjim]

10:53
Defence outlines reasons why Relowicz may have lied

Mr Saxby said: “How best to approach liars? The key is to look at the reasons he is lying. In the context of this case:

1. A lie told to hide his past behaviour.
2. A lie told because he shouldn’t have had sex with Libby Squire with the state she was in.
3. He wanted to conceal the fact he had had sex with her.
4. To make it look like it was all down to Libby Squire
5. A lie told because he was worried how it would look that he had had sex with her and left her there.

“Two more: A lie because he knew he had raped her, and a lie because he knew he had killed her.

“In the event of the first six, these aren’t lies, in the last two, if you’re convinced they’re to conceal guilt you have to consider, did he lie because he raped and/or killed her and he wanted to conceal that?

“He lied, but please be careful in taking the obvious shortcut and simply saying: ‘He lied so he has to be guilty of all counts.’ Check there isn’t an innocent reason, and if you decide he lied to conceal guilt, look at why.”

Libby Squire murder trial live updates: Defence give closing speech