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

[CoverMeCagney]

I wonder what people make of the fact that manslaughter hasn't been offered as an alternative charge to murder. Is the defence so confident PR's not guilty plea will be accepted by the jury that they don't feel the need to entertain a lesser charge?

I think I'm right in saying manslaughter has to be mentioned in the original charges, though the CPS website is ambiguous:

Manslaughter is an alternative verdict that can be returned on a prosecution for murder. Section 6 Criminal Law Act 1967 provides that, on an indictment for murder, a person found not guilty may be found guilty of manslaughter.
[...]
In murder cases, when a verdict of guilty of manslaughter arises as a real possibility, a separate count or counts of manslaughter should be added to the indictment. Notwithstanding Section 6 of the Criminal Law Act 1967, above, it is preferable to include any appropriate alternative counts in the indictment.
[...]
The prosecution should decide in advance of a murder trial whether or not an alternative count of manslaughter should be added to the indictment.​

(my bold)
Homicide: Murder and Manslaughter | The Crown Prosecution Service
Does 'should' here mean 'must'?

This is bothering me, as I can't help thinking (from the evidence presented in court) that manslaughter would be a safer verdict. IMO it's definitely PR's fault that Libby is dead, whether or not he killed her with his own hands. But as things stand, if the jury isn't convinced by the defence, they'll have to go straight to guilty of murder, if the compromise of manslaughter isn't available as an option. Or if the defence has sown some doubts, they would have to let PR off completely.

Would be interested to hear others' thoughts.

My thoughts are exactly the same as yours, feels like we’re on very shaky ground here. I just hope whatever the jury has heard and seen, it comes back unanimous...

 

[catgreen]

I'm sure that someone (on here previously) said that the judge can put manslaughter back on the table when they sum up, but I cant remember more details, sorry

 

[Sooty]

Plus... if there was a second man in the park, at the exact times all the multiple screams were heard, I am pretty sure he’d have come forward because he’d have heard those screams as clear as a bell that night.

I suppose the possibility exists that someone living nearby did hear screaming and went some way into the park to investigate. I know that seems remote, but I think it’s been mentioned before, there could be reasons why someone wouldn’t want to come forward and be a witness. Looking at SA witness account he gives a time window somewhere between 4-6 minutes after the last scream. If it’s considered possible for PR to get to the river to dispose of a body and back within 4 mins, it’s possible for someone to make a visit to investigate? SA wasn’t watching the whole time.

Another thing that troubles me about SA witness statement is why he didn’t call it in, if he truly thought he heard an attack on a female, and saw someone that he felt could be directly connected with it, leaving the park alone?

MOO

 

[Niner]

Thursday, Feb. 4th:
*Trial continues (Day 14)-VERDICT WATCH! (@ 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 - 2/2/21) reference post #265 here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Feb. 3rd Wednesday Day 13: We are expecting to hear the defence’s closing arguments, as well as some of the summing up of the case. Justice Lambert is now sitting & Relowicz is in the dock. The jury has been called up to the courtroom.
Defence barrister Oliver Saxby closing the defence case (#277, #279 & #280) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Closing continues: Relowicz had 'a moral responsibility' towards Libby. (#283, #285 to #288, #290, #292, #294) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Closing continues: Defence turns to Libby's emotional state at the time of her disappearance. (#301, #306, #309, #315, #316 & #318) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Closing continues: Libby could have acted in a 'reckless way' and 'wanted to express her torment', defence says. (#321) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
A break: closing continues: Mr. Saxby says: “The prosecution theory that ‘it wasn’t a great surprise to her friends that door staff refused her entry and she told them she would walk home.’ Let’s look at the evidence. (#355) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Closing continues (#366, #367, #369) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Closing continues: 'What happened at Oak Road?'(#383, 385 & #388) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Lunch break...
Trial resumed-Closing continues: Witness never called the police when hearing screams. (#466, #467, #472, #477) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Closing continues: Defence explains why Relowicz might have lied in police interviews. (#483); Jury asked to consider Libby died due to misadventure. (#486); "Was the man seen even Relowicz? (#493) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Judge gives jury legal directions. Justice Lambert says she is going to remind the jury of the main aspects of evidence of the case. (#515); Jury told to take all the evidence into account (#520) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
Judge continues: Directions on police interviews. (#524); Jury must consider why Relowicz told lies. (#526); Judge addresses Relowicz's previous convictions. (#528 & #530); Justice Lambert is now recapping on what the jury was told about Libby and her mental health battle. (#538) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
The judge said: “At the time of her death, her mother said she had not self-harmed for eight months and had not had any thoughts of suicide since her teenage years. (#541 & #542); Jury being reminded of what happened the night Libby disappeared. (#555); The judge now recapping Relowicz's movements. (#559) here:
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23
The trial has finished & will resume again on Thursday, 4/2/21 when Justice Lambert will complete her summing up & the jury will retire to consider their verdict.

 

[Sooty]

Just revisiting the early media reports when Libby went missing and the reporting of SA witnessing the screams. He says that he woke at 12:15 and heard screaming 7 or 8 times with gaps of about 30 secs in between - he states the screams went on for about FIFTEEN minutes, and then he saw a man leaving the park.

hmmm does it feel like it has been adjusted to fit a little to anyone else?

Girl heard screaming in park just minutes after Libby Squire vanished


Libby Squire disappearance: 'Eerie' screaming heard as student vanishes

 

[Newthoughts]

why would it be a coincidence? People were around at just about every step of this crime.
[edited to remove duplicated post of mine]

That is because for most of the night Libby was on a main road with shops and bus stops - not the park. Sainsburys was shutting as she was abducted. People were coming home from the pub. There's are pubs nearby. You could very reasonably expect other people to be around

In a dark park on a freezing cold night it is a less reasonable expectation. The druggies in our local parks disappear when it gets colder for example.

Then there is the timing.

 

[bos]

I suppose the possibility exists that someone living nearby did hear screaming and went some way into the park to investigate. I know that seems remote, but I think it’s been mentioned before, there could be reasons why someone wouldn’t want to come forward and be a witness. Looking at SA witness account he gives a time window somewhere between 4-6 minutes after the last scream. If it’s considered possible for PR to get to the river to dispose of a body and back within 4 mins, it’s possible for someone to make a visit to investigate? SA wasn’t watching the whole time.

Another thing that troubles me about SA witness statement is why he didn’t call it in, if he truly thought he heard an attack on a female, and saw someone that he felt could be directly connected with it, leaving the park alone?

MOO

BBM
He’s used to hearing noise/screams from the park and didn’t place any significance on them

He had no reason at the time to think the man he saw had anything to do with any attack as he wasn’t aware that one might have taken place.

He perhaps didn’t become immediately aware of police activity at ORPF as that was conducted during daylight hours when he was at work.

He wasn’t aware that someone had gone missing nearby

The police had to sort through info coming in from the public who thought they’d seen or heard something helpful regarding a missing student. The information would have come via telephone & from uniformed officers going door-to-door. Prioritising and allocating resources for follow up interviews would have taken time

His witness statement, used in court, was dated 4th February - realistic I think for realising that police were conducting a missing person’s enquiry and the realisation that what he’d heard/seen might be connected & for police to arrange taking his account

 

[Newthoughts]

Deleted by me duplicate

 

[Newthoughts]

BBM
He’s used to hearing noise/screams from the park and didn’t place any significance on them

He had no reason at the time to think the man he saw had anything to do with any attack as he wasn’t aware that one might have taken place.

He perhaps didn’t become immediately aware of police activity at ORPF as that was conducted during daylight hours when he was at work.

He wasn’t aware that someone had gone missing nearby

The police had to sort through info coming in from the public who thought they’d seen or heard something helpful regarding a missing student. The information would have come via telephone & from uniformed officers going door-to-door. Prioritising and allocating resources for follow up interviews would have taken time

His witness statement, used in court, was dated 4th February - realistic I think for realising that police were conducting a missing person’s enquiry and the realisation that what he’d heard/seen might be connected & for police to arrange taking his account

PR was arrested till the 6th and spidercam wasn't made public till the 8th so nothing to influence him regarding that location or a man

 

[bos]

Just revisiting the early media reports when Libby went missing and the reporting of SA witnessing the screams. He says that he woke at 12:15 and heard screaming 7 or 8 times with gaps of about 30 secs in between - he states the screams went on for about FIFTEEN minutes, and then he saw a man leaving the park.

hmmm does it feel like it has been adjusted to fit a little to anyone else?

Girl heard screaming in park just minutes after Libby Squire vanished


Libby Squire disappearance: 'Eerie' screaming heard as student vanishes

There is a difference between the questioning by tabloid journalists looking to elicit juicy details to sell papers and questioning by the police looking to establish facts.

 

[Sooty]

There is a difference between the questioning by tabloid journalists looking to elicit juicy details to sell papers and questioning by the police looking to establish facts.

I think it’s interesting because it has been noted throughout that there is some variation in his timings - which quite considerably alter the chances of PR being on the scene. These early reports indicate that the later timings would be more applicable. Which again support the other witnesses report which in turn appear to point to the fact that PR had left the scene at the least part before the screaming had stopped.

MOO

 

[Mommysleuth11]

Just revisiting the early media reports when Libby went missing and the reporting of SA witnessing the screams. He says that he woke at 12:15 and heard screaming 7 or 8 times with gaps of about 30 secs in between - he states the screams went on for about FIFTEEN minutes, and then he saw a man leaving the park.

hmmm does it feel like it has been adjusted to fit a little to anyone else?

Girl heard screaming in park just minutes after Libby Squire vanished


Libby Squire disappearance: 'Eerie' screaming heard as student vanishes

Another thing that concerns me slightly about the importance placed on SA testimony whilst apparently disregarding the TWO witnesses on Clarmont is, the Clarmont witnesses phoned them in on 2nd February, they waited only 1 day so events will have been very fresh in their minds. SA didn't report until 4th Feb and then it does appear initially he said (albeit to the media) a longer time frame that would actually tally up with the other 2 witnesses very very closely.
This isn't to say that either witness is right or wrong, just im not sure one set should be completely dismissed because it doesn't fit with PR murdering Libby.
Sometimes it does feel as though people would find PR guilty despite the evidence and not because of it (i see the temptation to do this i really do, the man is just ghastly), disregarding anything that doesn't fit the narrative yet placing vital importance on those bits that do. Moo

 

[Sooty]

Another thing that concerns me slightly about the importance placed on SA testimony whilst apparently disregarding the TWO witnesses on Clarmont is, the Clarmont witnesses phoned them in on 2nd February, they waited only 1 day so events will have been very fresh in their minds. SA didn't report until 4th Feb and then it does appear initially he said (albeit to the media) a longer time frame that would actually tally up with the other 2 witnesses very very closely.
This isn't to say that either witness is right or wrong, just im not sure one set should be completely dismissed because it doesn't fit with PR murdering Libby.
Sometimes it does feel as though people would find PR guilty despite the evidence and not because of it (i see the temptation to do this i really do, the man is just ghastly), disregarding anything that doesn't fit the narrative yet placing vital importance on those bits that do. Moo

Completely agree @Mommysleuth11.

 

[NorthernSoul]

I've found my post from last night which includes the relevant quote, if that helps?
UK - Libby Squire, 21, last seen outside Welly club, Hull, 31 Jan 2019 #23

The original article was in the Telegraph, but it's paywalled.
As others have pointed out, the father's comments are only hearsay evidence.

But I've just noticed the post I was quoting also includes an extract from a Daily Mirror article, where it's the son who says directly 'Then I saw a male running'.

Clear as mud.......

Thank you so much for this! I spent half an hour looking for it last night as it was preying on my mind. I realise that this is a newspaper report and that the father's statement is hearsay but still, for me, it throws SA's testimony slightly into doubt. Both father and son clearly state the person seen was running with the father then going on to describe him as sprinting at times. Very descriptive if he is completely making this up and had not been told this by his son. Did I also read somewhere that SA did not report this to the police for some time, while the other two people who saw the man and put the time at 12.30 reported this straight away? Also there does not seem to be any clarity or connection with PR as per what the man was wearing - if I recall correctly he was described as wearing a bomber jacket when PR has not been seen in such a jacket and in earlier posts people have theorised that he was maybe wearing Libby's jacket or had pulled his own jacket up, neither of which I feel is likely. Also locals have described the area as normally busy so even despite the inclement weather I don't think it is bizarre a person should be walking there - there could be many reasons. No, I'm not sure at all that this was PR.

 

[Sooty]

BBM
He’s used to hearing noise/screams from the park and didn’t place any significance on them

He had no reason at the time to think the man he saw had anything to do with any attack as he wasn’t aware that one might have taken place.

He perhaps didn’t become immediately aware of police activity at ORPF as that was conducted during daylight hours when he was at work.

He wasn’t aware that someone had gone missing nearby

The police had to sort through info coming in from the public who thought they’d seen or heard something helpful regarding a missing student. The information would have come via telephone & from uniformed officers going door-to-door. Prioritising and allocating resources for follow up interviews would have taken time

His witness statement, used in court, was dated 4th February - realistic I think for realising that police were conducting a missing person’s enquiry and the realisation that what he’d heard/seen might be connected & for police to arrange taking his account

BBM

Therefore, it would suggest The screams he heard did not indicate that that they came from someone being murdered.

MOO

 

[Newthoughts]

BBM

Therefore, it would suggest The screams he heard did not indicate that that they came from someone being murdered.

MOO

Nor does it indicate that they came from the tortured desperate soul quoted by the defence solicitor. And you still have the problem of the mystery man

 

[Newthoughts]

Thank you so much for this! I spent half an hour looking for it last night as it was preying on my mind. I realise that this is a newspaper report and that the father's statement is hearsay but still, for me, it throws SA's testimony slightly into doubt. Both father and son clearly state the person seen was running with the father then going on to describe him as sprinting at times. Very descriptive if he is completely making this up and had not been told this by his son. Did I also read somewhere that SA did not report this to the police for some time, while the other two people who saw the man and put the time at 12.30 reported this straight away? Also there does not seem to be any clarity or connection with PR as per what the man was wearing - if I recall correctly he was described as wearing a bomber jacket when PR has not been seen in such a jacket and in earlier posts people have theorised that he was maybe wearing Libby's jacket or had pulled his own jacket up, neither of which I feel is likely. Also locals have described the area as normally busy so even despite the inclement weather I don't think it is bizarre a person should be walking there - there could be many reasons. No, I'm not sure at all that this was PR.

Have locals described the area normally busy at that time? Genuine question cos I've missed that and the yeast factory footage looked very quiet.

 

[mrazda71]

I suppose the possibility exists that someone living nearby did hear screaming and went some way into the park to investigate. I know that seems remote, but I think it’s been mentioned before, there could be reasons why someone wouldn’t want to come forward and be a witness. Looking at SA witness account he gives a time window somewhere between 4-6 minutes after the last scream. If it’s considered possible for PR to get to the river to dispose of a body and back within 4 mins, it’s possible for someone to make a visit to investigate? SA wasn’t watching the whole time.

Another thing that troubles me about SA witness statement is why he didn’t call it in, if he truly thought he heard an attack on a female, and saw someone that he felt could be directly connected with it, leaving the park alone?

MOO

What witness wouldn't come forward and say anything, even anonymously, once it was made public that Libby was missing?

Re BBM - SA and several others have said that screaming students want a rarity round there AND as he saw only a mam leaving - no girl/woman in sight he likely wouldn't jump straight to the conclusion that a woman had been murdered. Most brains don't work that way ... just like few people bother to call police either. They deliberate if should they call 101 or 999 then if they should call at all, reasoning often that 'it was probably nothing' and most often that 'someone else will have called'.

 

[NorthernSoul]

I think it’s interesting because it has been noted throughout that there is some variation in his timings - which quite considerably alter the chances of PR being on the scene. These early reports indicate that the later timings would be more applicable. Which again support the other witnesses report which in turn appear to point to the fact that PR had left the scene at the least part before the screaming had stopped.

MOO

Completely agree with this. This is a key issue which throws the prosecution case into doubt. The fact the prosecution did not call the other witnesses who heard the screams makes it look as though they are selecting evidence to suit only the scenario they want the jury to believe. They might have been better including them I feel and leaving it for the jury to interpret.

 

[HLC35]

Another thing that concerns me slightly about the importance placed on SA testimony whilst apparently disregarding the TWO witnesses on Clarmont is, the Clarmont witnesses phoned them in on 2nd February, they waited only 1 day so events will have been very fresh in their minds. SA didn't report until 4th Feb and then it does appear initially he said (albeit to the media) a longer time frame that would actually tally up with the other 2 witnesses very very closely.
This isn't to say that either witness is right or wrong, just im not sure one set should be completely dismissed because it doesn't fit with PR murdering Libby.
Sometimes it does feel as though people would find PR guilty despite the evidence and not because of it (i see the temptation to do this i really do, the man is just ghastly), disregarding anything that doesn't fit the narrative yet placing vital importance on those bits that do. Moo

I completely understand and appreciate your point. The timings of the (different?) screams certainly cast some doubt. Reasonable doubt? I will absolutely put my hands up to admitting I would lock PR up forever whatever the evidence. Partly emotionally led, yes, partly on his previous convictions and a person such as him being the last person to see Libby alive. The lies, yes, and his attitude and behaviour since evidence being put to him that she was a) found, b) found with his semen in her. This is partly conjecture, and my gut/heart feeling. I’ll admit that. But for me, he caused the trauma and harm that led to Libby’s death. It’s daft; every day I still hope Libby will be found alive and well and go home to her parents, or that a big piece of undeniable evidence will be found that will give her family the conviction and peace they need.Moo