Search results

No one said it did.

Because they wanted justice for poor William. Same reason we’re all here talking about it so many years later.

<modsnip - quoted post and response was removed> I don’t support the police’s actions but I understand why they did it. I could never understand why you would lock a small child outside on their own or call them a c*** for failing to close a door properly. I don’t care how much the pressure...

I originally assumed this was the case, perhaps wrongly. Going by the reporting, the abuse was in response to: -the child not closing the front door properly after it had modifications -the child losing some of their clothes -the child not having time to complete a household chore. To me the...

Hard disagree…It’s arguably the highest profile criminal investigation in the country and the DPP aren’t operating in a vacuum, they know there will be huge repercussions and media interest in whatever decision they make. It’s not likely it’s going to be sitting in the back of some drawer...

Especially on the day it happened. Id be out there in the dark screaming my lungs out. But that’s just me.

I don’t believe it’s at all standard for journalists to let POIs tell them what is and isn’t fact. For example, if Bill Spedding told a journalist he was in Victoria that day, should they report that as fact or simply say it was something that BS had alleged that hadn’t been verified? This is...

The journalist literally said they got the campaign to fact check their articles - ie tell them whether something is factual or not. It was posted by someone upthread in promotional material for insight

Yes I know what fact checking is…what concerns me is the idea that the foster parents were able to act as the arbiter of what was “factual” and “true”. It’s not like a journalist would have let Bill Spedding dictate what was factual in their article.

No, I mean that one of the journalists said the campaign was able to help fact check her stories.

Exactly, or a case where a POI was able to “fact check” journalists articles. The whole concept is actually laughable

What in particular do you believe is defamatory about the latest Daily Mail article?

Just my opinion but I just don’t buy that you would forget hitting your kid with a wooden spoon, especially if it was enough to warrant phone conversations about it later. Putting aside the morality of what FM did, I’m surprised purely from a pragmatic point of view. I mean she must have felt...

Pretty sure most people would be roasted for such a careless and prominent error. Star detective or not, he is not above the law, he only has himself to blame for flouting the rules and getting himself kicked off the case. He may be right in calling for this inquiry, but I find it distasteful to...

IMO the FPS have benefited greatly from a lack of scrutiny from not being publicly identified, and would have suffered far less than the other POIs (in this case and in other similar cases). Most of the general public would still have no idea who they are. Far cry from Lindy Chamberlain and Cleo...

I would like to think police are on the right track with FFC because it means we would finally be getting close to answers. But imo on the face of it so far the circumstantial evidence against FA is stronger. But it also appears that the public is not privy to the key new info that has sent...

I just find the “helicopter parent needing to watch them every second of the day” comment a little disingenuous. Surely leaving your kids unattended on a large unfenced bushland property is a totally different kettle of fish to leaving them unsupervised in a contained kid-proofed yard. I would...

Yep that’s possible too…haven’t seen what their new home looks like?

I originally thought this but it’s now twice I’ve seen Moore/more redacted which makes a misspelling seem less likely. Thanks, this seems plausible. Makes you wonder if there were other witnesses to the drive apart from the truck driver.

Hmmm interesting that drive really slow on *advertiser censored* is bleeped out in this particular version. Does anyone know if there’s a suppression order over that part of her evidence?