Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sep 2014 - #67

[stormbird]

The article I quoted refers to homicide detectives being involved from the outset. In the Tyrrell case, homicide's Strike Force Rosann was not established until 16 September 2014, four days after WT was reported missing.

It's possible the Homicide Squad was informed as soon as police thought William might have been the victim of a suspicious death. A recommendation by Deputy State Coroner MacMahon in October 2013 (at the inquest into the disappearance and suspected death of Belinda Peisley) was that "consideration be given to the amendment of the [NSW Police Force] 'Missing Persons – Standard Operating Procedures' so as to require that where the risk assessment undertaken identifies that there is a high, or very high risk that the missing person has been the victim of a homicide or otherwise suspicious death, the Homicide Squad is to be immediately advised of the circumstances of the disappearance."
In response, in May 2014 the Commissioner of Police undertook to make changes.
- from Coronial recommendations, see the link in "Table containing response to Coronial recommendations" under June 2013 - December 2013

But maybe there wasn't time for those changes to take effect before William went missing.

 

[JBowie]

But maybe there wasn't time for those changes to take effect before William went missing.

Given that the house and grounds at Benaroon Drive had all and sundry tramping around on the first day or more then it would seem that was the case. These days we would expect the location to be treated as an incident/crime scene from the get-go with it being taped off quickly and only police and forensic investigators allowed to cross the line.

 

[stormbird]

Given that the house and grounds at Benaroon Drive had all and sundry tramping around on the first day or more then it would seem that was the case. These days we would expect the location to be treated as an incident/crime scene from the get-go with it being taped off quickly and only police and forensic investigators allowed to cross the line.

If that's what the standard operating procedures are, then yes. But maybe it depends on the situation and the risk assessment.

Here's a roughly-similar location in a recent missing-child case in Putty NSW where there's no visible police tape* at the incident/crime scene (if "incident/crime scene" is where the missing person is last seen?):

- from: Search for three-year-old [AJ E] continues Monday as police seize white utility, Newcastle Herald, 6 Sep 2021

Thankfully the little boy was found alive and well, so the media was full of praise afterwards. MOO

*But maybe it's possible the police did put up tape in the first hours at Putty and then dropped it later. The article is talking about the fourth day of the search.
And another photo in the same article does show tape at another location on the property, but my guess is that it was there to control who went into the search headquarters or command post, instead of being there to protect evidence. MOO

 

[katydid23]

Overzealous media gag a flawed quirk of NSW law


Overzealous media gag a flawed quirk of NSW law


If William Tyrrell’s abductor was arrested and charged today, the Herald would not be able to report that fact.

It could tell its readers only that a person had been charged with the abduction and murder of a three-year-old boy. It might get away with saying the crime is alleged to have taken place in 2014. At a stretch, it could say the boy was abducted from a house in Kendall. But it would not be able to publish William Tyrrell’s name or include any details that might enable its readers to identify him.
....snipped....
This law, well intentioned but overzealous, is unique to NSW. There is nothing else like it in any other state or territory in Australia. In fact, publishers in other states could name William with impunity in any report of the charging of his abductor and run photos of him, as long as their publications did not enter NSW.

This prohibition, contained in s15E of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act, was in the spotlight again this week in the CMtragedy. The Heraldpublished many stories about the nine-year-old’s disappearance from Friday of last week which named her and included her photo, up until police laid criminal charges over her killing on Tuesday. Once those charges were laid, suddenly she could no longer be named nor her photograph published because she was the victim in an alleged child homicide case.

 

[JBowie]

Overzealous media gag a flawed quirk of NSW law

Did you miss post #578?

 

[Warshawski]

Thinking of you William. Surely the answers will come.

 

[stormbird]

Did you miss post #578?

This might not explain every "blanked" post, JBowie (some of mine have been apparently invisible too), but at one time there was an option somewhere in Websleuths' member settings where a user could choose to see posts listed either in chronological order or as threads. It would be easy for users to miss seeing posts if they've chosen the "threads" option, I think. (But in trying to check this before posting I went through the list of settings and preferences and couldn't find the option, so MOO. I think it was there.)

 

[JLZ]

So, my point is: The walkthrough video has been edited and has resulted in the fact that it is only FFC’s description of her drive to the Riding School (6 days later) that has been released for us, the public, to view.

I can't hear what she's saying. Is she specific in that clip that it's the day of William's disappearance she's talking about? We've talked a bit about her 'circumstantiality' if that's the right word, and I wouldn't be too surprised if while talking about the Friday she branched off into something that happened on a later day, without clearly marking the segue. Possibly something people do to maintain control of the conversation.

 

[Cagney&Lacey]

Good point there Stormbird. I receive posts on threads but quite frequently members are replying to posts I've never received. I just assumed they had since been deleted.

 

[stormbird]

I can't hear what she's saying. Is she specific in that clip that it's the day of William's disappearance she's talking about? We've talked a bit about her 'circumstantiality' if that's the right word, and I wouldn't be too surprised if while talking about the Friday she branched off into something that happened on a later day, without clearly marking the segue. Possibly something people do to maintain control of the conversation.

Interesting idea, JLZ. I'd assumed FFC was talking about the first day, but in fact the clip doesn't mention anything like that.

There's a transcript by organised_chaos in thread 63, post 897 and I think someone else might have done one too? And I heard a few words a bit differently so I'm having a go as well:

From a video "Tyrrell's foster mum describes her desperate search for missing boy" (0:22) in the article "'This is ridiculous. He's not down here': William Tyrrell's foster mother describes her desperate search for the missing three year old to police in never before seen video shot days after his disappearance", Daily Mail Australia, 27 March 2019

FFC: "... a semi-trailer coming down really fast and I've pulle--I--he think--he thought I pulled over cause he acknowledged me by saying thanks for pulling over
Police: Hm-mm.
FFC: [continuing] but I pulled over cause I've just got my head out the window looking for William.
Police: Hm. Hm.
FFC: And then I drive really slow on [bleeped], get to the riding school and I just think 'He's not here'.
Police: Yeah.
FFC: And then I bring the car back up [pauses] and I just run out and I look for him again, ..."

Just based on a statement by MFC at the inquest, I think FFC was probably only out searching on the first day. But maybe that's not what MFC meant:

"I searched every day," [MFC] told the court. "My wife and my mother-in-law were at the house with (William's sister)."
- William Tyrrell’s foster dad searched bushland for days, News.com.au, 27 March 2019

 

[JLZ]

Interesting idea, JLZ. I'd assumed FFC was talking about the first day, but in fact the clip doesn't mention anything like that.

There's a transcript by organised_chaos in thread 63, post 897 and I think someone else might have done one too? And I heard a few words a bit differently so I'm having a go as well:

From a video "Tyrrell's foster mum describes her desperate search for missing boy" (0:22) in the article "'This is ridiculous. He's not down here': William Tyrrell's foster mother describes her desperate search for the missing three year old to police in never before seen video shot days after his disappearance", Daily Mail Australia, 27 March 2019

FFC: "... a semi-trailer coming down really fast and I've pulle--I--he think--he thought I pulled over cause he acknowledged me by saying thanks for pulling over
Police: Hm-mm.
FFC: [continuing] but I pulled over cause I've just got my head out the window looking for William.
Police: Hm. Hm.
FFC: And then I drive really slow on [bleeped], get to the riding school and I just think 'He's not here'.
Police: Yeah.
FFC: And then I bring the car back up [pauses] and I just run out and I look for him again, ..."

Just based on a statement by MFC at the inquest, I think FFC was probably only out searching on the first day. But maybe that's not what MFC meant:

"I searched every day," [MFC] told the court. "My wife and my mother-in-law were at the house with (William's sister)."
- William Tyrrell’s foster dad searched bushland for days, News.com.au, 27 March 2019

I'm assuming that most of us are puzzled that FFC's search in the car features in the video statement and nowhere else that we know of. The video statement is six days after the disappearance. It's looking less likely that William is lost than it did when FFC made her initial statement. So one might take the view that FFC's and/or the police's sense of what things are relevant to be remembered has changed.

 

[MissUnderstood]

From when we first heard that little William was missing I always thought it strange that there was very little to no speculation about the family. Like when a spouse goes missing, most of our first thoughts are “the other spouse did it”. When kids go missing, most of the time our first thoughts are “parents or boyfriend/girlfriend of parent did it” even reading between the lines in media we get pushed in a certain train of thought. This case went to abduction right away. That has always bothered me. What was it that cleared the foster family at the start? If WT disappeared from a low income housing estate where he lived with his mum and her boyfriend would they have been cleared so fast at the start? What was it that pushed the pedofile abduction theory so early on? Moo

 

[Nessie]

Interesting idea, JLZ. I'd assumed FFC was talking about the first day, but in fact the clip doesn't mention anything like that.

There's a transcript by organised_chaos in thread 63, post 897 and I think someone else might have done one too? And I heard a few words a bit differently so I'm having a go as well:

From a video "Tyrrell's foster mum describes her desperate search for missing boy" (0:22) in the article "'This is ridiculous. He's not down here': William Tyrrell's foster mother describes her desperate search for the missing three year old to police in never before seen video shot days after his disappearance", Daily Mail Australia, 27 March 2019

FFC: "... a semi-trailer coming down really fast and I've pulle--I--he think--he thought I pulled over cause he acknowledged me by saying thanks for pulling over
Police: Hm-mm.
FFC: [continuing] but I pulled over cause I've just got my head out the window looking for William.
Police: Hm. Hm.
FFC: And then I drive really slow on [bleeped], get to the riding school and I just think 'He's not here'.
Police: Yeah.
FFC: And then I bring the car back up [pauses] and I just run out and I look for him again, ..."

Just based on a statement by MFC at the inquest, I think FFC was probably only out searching on the first day. But maybe that's not what MFC meant:

"I searched every day," [MFC] told the court. "My wife and my mother-in-law were at the house with (William's sister)."
- William Tyrrell’s foster dad searched bushland for days, News.com.au, 27 March 2019

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?

 

[Sillybilly]

Not specifically applicable to the Tyrrell case, but something that has puzzled me for a long time.

This article in the SMH, triggered by the tragic death of 9 year old <redacted>, puts the spotlight on NSW's bizarre regulations regarding naming of children -- first we all know who the kid is and then suddenly we are not allowed to know anymore:

<rsbm>

I've told this before, but it reminds me of what the Russian government official said when a reporter confronted him about the terrible condition of the accommodations for the Olympics a few years ago. The reporter said (paraphrased) "We've seen pictures of the bad condition of the rooms". The Russian official responded "No you didn't".

 

[JLZ]

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?

"Moore" is still quoted in MSM eg here https://www.news.com.au/national/ns...o/news-story/c785efb1ae0d0864af718ca48b6775a6 so presumably no suppression order. Can anyone make sense of it?

 

[Blues Clues]

"Moore" is still quoted in MSM eg here William Tyrrell’s foster dad details his frantic search for toddler so presumably no suppression order. Can anyone make sense of it?

Another case of misreporting. FFC was saying more not Moore.

And then I drive really slow on more (as in - on further), get to the riding school and I just think 'He's not here'.

IMO

 

[JLZ]

Another case of misreporting. FFC was saying more not Moore.

And then I drive really slow on more (as in - on further), get to the riding school and I just think 'He's not here'.

IMO

Thank you. I briefly considered 'more' and dismissed it as not making sense grammatically. But yes it might mean 'on further', in baby language.

 

[Doesitmakesense]

IMO I find the FFFC puts her stentances together in weird manner. She speaks somewhat formally, but structure and words used just don't work as well as something else would have. Did the FFFC parents speak English as a second language?

 

[stormbird]

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?

"Moore" is still quoted in MSM eg here William Tyrrell’s foster dad details his frantic search for toddler so presumably no suppression order. Can anyone make sense of it?

The walk-through video for MFC* seems to have people's names bleeped out, so maybe the same is true in FFC's walk-through? e.g. maybe she described where she went by using people's names instead of the name of the road e.g. "I drove past A's place then B's place and etc"?

In FFC's triple-0 call to police she was unable to recognise "Ellendale Crescent" (off Benaroon Drive, and named on a signpost she would have passed every time she visited her parents' house): see my post thread 57, post 144. I think it's possible FFC had never previously needed to talk about the local roads and had not given them much attention.

Also, there are two articles in the Kendall Chronicle which are relevant if FFC did use names of people in the walk-through, IMO, but presumably I can't link to the articles or cite them because they identify FFC's late relatives and some of their community interests. My opinion only:

1. M**** was the name of a Kendall person who had died a couple of years previously
2. At a birthday party for one of FFC's relatives several years previously, the party goers were asked that instead of giving presents they donate to two local charities, one of which was the "riding school". From this I'm just guessing that it's possible FFC knew about the "riding school" and where it was or who was involved in it, which might have led to her being able to describe how she got there when searching for William even if she hadn't known the name of the road.

MOO

*Re MFC's walk-through video: for example, see William Tyrrell's disappearance inquest shown police video, Mercury, 25 March 2019
There's a bleep at 0:07 when MFC points to the back deck (talking about FGM?) and about 4:04 (talking about FFC calling police). Note that the video length is 5:12 (parts of it are different to a 7:05 minute version via Daily Mail Australia's YouTube) and for me this video will only play if cookies and advertisements are allowed.

 

[Rumination1]

No results back yet on their findings in November
I have a couple of thoughts ( MOO)
Why such certainty he didn’t walk or get taken up hill ?
Why so long to make the recollections the FFC did re the cars and the driving ?
Upon my recent experience of missing dog, I can’t imagine she found W and then transported him silently nor can I imagine not searching for him frantically.
The MFC emerging from a bathroom crying still seems odd to me.