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

[jamjim]

11:20
Libby 'very vulnerable'

Justice Lambert is going over the evidence of Professor Charles Deakin is a consultant in intensive care, who shed light on Libby’s condition on the night she disappeared.

The judge reminds the jury that Libby was both drunk and probably suffering the affects of the cold which impaired her judgment and physical abilities.

Just Lamber said: "Prof Deakin said there was evidence of poor or impaired decision making. He said she was very vulnerable to a number of threats.

"He was asked whether her ability to defend herself would have been affected. He said she would have had a very limited ability to physically defend herself.”

Libby Squire murder trial live: Judge to sum up evidence

 

[mrjitty]

And there is no evidence to advance a manslaughter case, IMO.

Agree.

I believe it would be the safest verdict - in that he is broadly responsible for her death and we can't be sure exactly how - but it simply doesn't arise sufficiently on the pleadings/evidence

So technically, we can't go there

 

[Zazie]

So (as per summing up) Dr Lyall ruled out natural causes; said drowning unlikely; hypothermia plausible, and asphyxiation possible.

 

[jamjim]

11:22
What Relowicz did after meeting Libby

Justice Lambert recalled what Relowicz did after meeting Libby.

She said: “You had him at home at 12.23am before going back out at 2.22am.

"You know during that time he was on Chaturbate [ site] and that he went out again to Oak Road, the lights pick up at the Astra at around 2.25am and they are seen going onto Beresford Avenue four and a half minutes later.

"You know he drove around the streets of Hull and drove onto the Raglan Street just before 3am and he set off again on foot.

"You know during this period he masturbated in Alexandra Road and you know a used condom containing his DNA was found there the next day.”

Libby Squire murder trial live: Judge to sum up evidence

 

[NorthernSoul]

Like I say, this can sound like misfeasance or trying to hide the evidence, but these witnesses were always going to be called.

Clearly the prosecution wanted to X them, and the defence is better to lead them. So then the prosecution don't call them, knowing the defence will. Often this is discussed in the pretrial organisation.

The implication that the prosecution were trying to gloss over or hide this evidence by not calling the witness is misleading. It is about whose case they fit with.

Thank you for explaining. Yes, this is the point I was trying to make albeit not very well. That the testimony of the second witnesses fit better with the case for the defence than the case for the prosecution.

 

[mrjitty]

11:09
Cause of death not determined

Justice Lambert has turned to the evidence on patholgist Dr Matthew Lyall.

She told the jury: "Dr Lyall described his methodical examination of the body - there were 14 marks, abrasions, areas of bruising he found but he could not determine whether they were caused before or after death.

"One thing Dr Lyall could say was that Libby had not died of natural causes. Apart from that, he could not ascertain the cause of death.

"He said he wasn’t prepared to say that death by drowning was the likely explanation as classical features were not present.

“He was asked about hypothermia. He said it was a plausible explanation and he couldn’t exclude it but could not advance it as a cause."

Justic Lambert also reminded the jury Dr Lyall could not rule out a violent death,much as asphyxiation despite no obvious injuries to the neck area."

Libby Squire murder trial live: Judge to sum up evidence

BIB

This seems quite critical.

I wish we had the coverage of the detailed EIC and exhibits! We are so reliant on how the journo summarises

 

[Tortoise]

BIB

This seems quite critical.

I wish we had the coverage of the detailed EIC and exhibits! We are so reliant on how the journo summarises

Seems to have been covered in the reporting in more detail yesterday -

13:02KEY EVENT
Defence on how Libby might have died
Mr Saxby said: “Possible ways she might have died:

• "Drowning, some of the possible features were not present. Some of the classical features like fluid on one side of the chest were present - his evidence brushed under the carpet to be found with some of her mental health issues. He said it couldn’t be likely but could be as much as possible as the others.
• “Asphyxiation: Cupping over the mouth to create an airtight seal. Unlike drowning there were none of the signs you can sometimes see. He noted, to be complete, lacerations to the inside of the lip but couldn’t see whether they had been caused before or after death. It isn’t to say she wasn’t asphyxiated but if Dr Lyall was having to rely on pathological evidence that she was asphyxiated then it provides us with no assistance.
  
• “Hypothermia: Professor Deakin was asked for help on five specific questions. Theory meets reality. It’s OK for him to say how he thought she would behave and we have evidence of how she was behaving.”

Mr Saxby has asked whether Libby would be “capable of keeping her footing” in the river if she had fallen or gone in herself - he said: “She would not have survived.”

 

[mrazda71]

When does everyone think a verdict will be in?

A, Today
B, Tomorrow
C, Next week

 

[mrjitty]

The screams definitely confuse things a little and if only one witness had come forward then it would be so much more clear cut.

But as none of the 3 witnesses have come forward saying they heard 2 lots of screams then I am fully accepting that somewhere along the line the timings have been a little muddled up and I am more willing to believe that a trained military person would be more accurate with the information and the times so I personally think the witness statement of SA is the more accurate one.

It reminds me of the pistorius case where different neighbours heard different things and timed events via different clocks.

What was important is there were reasons why some heard things that others didn't and why the clocks were not the same. I tend to think the broad brush of the evidence is most important.

Multiple people heard her screaming in the park, and then PR had to fess up to that at the last moment. But based on his own evidence, there is no reason why she'd be screaming after he left.

To me that's a key blunder - he doesn't say she was screaming after he left.

 

[CoverMeCagney]

When does everyone think a verdict will be in?

A, Today
B, Tomorrow
C, Next week

I don’t know but I am really on edge today so the sooner the better! Best guess would be tomorrow but hoping for today.

 

[Sally4x]

For me any sign of innocence goes when PR returns to ORPF for the third time. IMO that is when he puts her in the river. I don’t see any other reason for him to return there. After that he seems to be on a sexual high and goes back out looking for someone else and ends his successful night by mastubating in the street. This man is disgusting and needs to spend the rest of his life in jail IMO.

 

[Skigh]

I don’t know but I am really on edge today so the sooner the better! Best guess would be tomorrow but hoping for today.

Those are exactly my thoughts too.

 

[Tortoise]

It reminds me of the pistorius case where different neighbours heard different things and timed events via different clocks.

What was important is there were reasons why some heard things that others didn't and why the clocks were not the same. I tend to think the broad brush of the evidence is most important.

Multiple people heard her screaming in the park, and then PR had to fess up to that at the last moment. But based on his own evidence, there is no reason why she'd be screaming after he left.

To me that's a key blunder - he doesn't say she was screaming after he left.

how can he say what she was doing after he left?

 

[astheworldfallsdown]

I'm also hoping for a verdict today.

 

[mrjitty]

Seems to have been covered in the reporting in more detail yesterday -

13:02KEY EVENT
Defence on how Libby might have died
Mr Saxby said: “Possible ways she might have died:

• "Drowning, some of the possible features were not present. Some of the classical features like fluid on one side of the chest were present - his evidence brushed under the carpet to be found with some of her mental health issues. He said it couldn’t be likely but could be as much as possible as the others.
• “Asphyxiation: Cupping over the mouth to create an airtight seal. Unlike drowning there were none of the signs you can sometimes see. He noted, to be complete, lacerations to the inside of the lip but couldn’t see whether they had been caused before or after death. It isn’t to say she wasn’t asphyxiated but if Dr Lyall was having to rely on pathological evidence that she was asphyxiated then it provides us with no assistance.
  
• “Hypothermia: Professor Deakin was asked for help on five specific questions. Theory meets reality. It’s OK for him to say how he thought she would behave and we have evidence of how she was behaving.”

Mr Saxby has asked whether Libby would be “capable of keeping her footing” in the river if she had fallen or gone in herself - he said: “She would not have survived.”

I think you might be right that she got away from him

I suspect he might have chased her and she blundered in the river - the timings could work for that - especially if he turned back before she went in - but she might not have known where he was

Then he went back to check the crime scene

 

[Joolz1975]

I don’t know but I am really on edge today so the sooner the better! Best guess would be tomorrow but hoping for today.

Same Cags.

 

[Newthoughts]

So (as per summing up) Dr Lyall ruled out natural causes; said drowning unlikely; hypothermia plausible, and asphyxiation possible.

And yesterday she said draw inferences.

 

[mrjitty]

how can he say what she was doing after he left?

I think for his version to work with the prosecution evidence as well as the defence, he needs to leave with her alive, heading into the park shouting etc

IMO the problem of his version is it is tailored to the defence witnesses, but it can't explain the strong prosecution witness.

So then you get into the Pistorian nonsense of shouting being mistaken for screaming etc and Libby needing to be shouting and screaming for an extended period which makes no real sense.

 

[Joolz1975]

For me any sign of innocence goes when PR returns to ORPF for the third time. IMO that is when he puts her in the river. I don’t see any other reason for him to return there. After that he seems to be on a sexual high and goes back out looking for someone else and ends his successful night by mastubating in the street. This man is disgusting and needs to spend the rest of his life in jail IMO.

But do you think he murdered her there? Or just left her and found her body on his return?

 

[HullGirl72]

It’s obvious we’ve only heard scraps of what was actually said.
The reporter although doing their job isn’t emotionally invested like we are.
I’m hoping they decide soon.
Waiting over the weekend will be awful for them in a hotel in the snow and for us too
I just want her parents back at home where they belong ASAP.