Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sep 2014 - #69

[JBowie]

Thank you, again. So I suppose it's possible that both cameras were way out, depending on their set up. I would have thought police would have checked the accuracy beyond merely comparing the outside camera to the inside camera, but there seem to be some basic things they didn't do in this case so not impossible that they didn't.

Again, it's not the cameras themselves that are 'out' it's the DVR that they are connected to. So, if there is just one DVR catering to all cameras at a location, then all video recorded from them will be 'out' by the same amount.

OTOH, if cameras are split over two or more DVRs -- and that would usually only be the case for a large system -- then video of the same event taken from different DVRs could be timestamped differently depending on the accuracy of the (unsynchronized) DVR clocks.

 

[centred]

I see it now. I think my reply to this will cover both anyway.

I think police have a pretty solid theory involving the FPs and they're trying to gather evidence around that, but it is difficult because of the amount of time that has passed and the fact that certain crucial things were not done in the first place. They are very limited in what they can do. I think that, as you say subsequently, they really want to solve this, so they'll throw the kitchen sink at it if they have to.

So I think they did it for a combination of three things: to see what other evidence might come out of it (so yes, a fishing expedition, but because of the particular difficulty of obtaining new evidence in this case). to apply pressure, and also because they are pissed off. If the FPs have lied about something crucial that has thrown this entire investigation out of whack, that's 7 years of work down the drain. I'd be pissed, too.


Oh 100% I think GJ wanted to solve this. I actually think it was the case that broke him, and that's why he ended up going way too far. But people have blind spots, and he had such extreme tunnel vision I can believe he missed things. If the FPs were involved, let's not forget, they fooled most of the country at one point. GJ is an unbelievable police officer, but he's still human.

Thanks for the insights .

I also 100% agree re GJ I also held him in high esteem re a close interest in the Bowraville case for obvious reasons , However i also think you are correct when he gets to close he tries to people please IMO




Re this sentence in the link previously posted Inspector Jubelin said his intention was “to prove that beyond reasonable doubt, William’s disappearance was the result of human intervention and not misadventure”.

I too believe his blind spot is a case of The Myopic Detective The myopic detective - IMDb

 

[Akai]

I think you're right - I imagine millions of dollars ha e been spent on Strike Force Rosann over the last 7 years, not to mention the money raised through the Where's William Campaign. If there is evidence that they have deliberately and systematically misled the public and have profited from this in anyway (did they get paid for interviews such as 60 minutes and Lia Harris podcast???), then this would constitute a very serious crime that may warrant the involvement of the NSWCC IMO.

I have pondered this exact scenario myself.

I believe this is how they may have gotten the NSW Crime Commission involved because they needed something to bring it under the Commission's remit/jurisdiction. Charge could be for lying about something to do with this or it could be that they want to prove a lying charge (ie prove that they misled the investigation) before going after them for possible financial crimes.

I think it would relate to the Where's William campaign and any profits from interviews rather than the investigation cost.

 

[Akai]

Again, it's not the cameras themselves that are 'out' it's the DVR that they are connected to. So, if there is just one DVR catering to all cameras at a location, then all video recorded from them will be 'out' by the same amount.

OTOH, if cameras are split over two or more DVRs -- and that would usually only be the case for a large system -- then video of the same event taken from different DVRs could be timestamped differently deepening on the accuracy of the (unsynchronized) DVR clocks.

They must have been on different systems because they were showing times 9 minutes apart.

 

[JBowie]

Oh 100% I think GJ wanted to solve this. I actually think it was the case that broke him, and that's why he ended up going way too far. But people have blind spots, and he had such extreme tunnel vision I can believe he missed things. If the FPs were involved, let's not forget, they fooled most of the country at one point. GJ is an unbelievable police officer, but he's still human.

This certainly was the case that broke him, although there was a long lead up to it, including events in his turbulent private life.

GJ was in charge of Rosann but he had a team of detectives under him, and they had their own opinions about what may have happened to William and who, if anyone, might have been involved.

In his book I Catch Killers he admits that, towards the end, he was becoming increasingly isolated because of his style and his opinions as to who to target as likely suspects and to what degree.

Throughout his police career, GJ burnt a few bridges and created some internal enemies who, once in positions of power, were not averse to seeing GJ out of the force, one way or another.

<modsnip: Hearsay/rumor not allowed>

 

[Couldbe]

I think there's a fair chance they haven't even got the right car. After all, he only drove past the club, he wasn't in the car park.

If you right JLZ and it wasn't in fact MFC's vehicle, then we would be left with the 9.30am departure from the house.

 

[deugirtni]

I tend to agree, when following the theory of the FFC being a POI. Too difficult to cover up a death/accident within a short time fame and not have tripped up in 7+ years. It would indicate to me rather an inside planned abduction. But what is the motive? I think it was the member FromGermany that offered the idea, maybe the FP's bit off more than they could chew, taking on 2 FC's and there was too much to risk in handing WT back to be able to hold onto his sister... maybe a lot of misguided thinking about the future. Maybe he was handed on to other people who wanted a child. Maybe he wasn't in his spiderman suit when he went missing. Maybe he didn't go missing from Benaroon Dr. but more around Lakewood, sometime before the MFC's skype meeting. Apparently there is no indication WT is dead. MOO.

The words used when FM described the time of W's disappearance have always bothered me. Who says, 'moved him on'? Moved him on to what? Moved him on to where? Moved him on to whom? Moved him on for what purpose? Moved him on why? Moved him on how? Wouldn't it be more .... usual... to, rather, say something like, 'someone just took him', if it was believed he had been taken as opposed to lost, or found while perhaps toddling down the road? Why would one immediately think or assume that W was 'moved on'?

This is directly out of the mouth of FM during her their televised 'police interview', this paragraph starts approx 6:18. Note this 'police interview' is available from other sources as well:

FM: I thought that immediately. I had a vision in my head, I don’t know why, but I have a vision in my head, somebody.. I’d.. I can’t explain it.. somebody reached over and I sort of feel like they’ve gone clump on his shoulders, picked him up and moved him on, because to me that’s the only way, it’s the only way I can explain for him not to be there. I’d, I’d, I’m, I don’t, I don’t get it. I don’t.. how can a little boy, how can a 3 year old boy just (snaps fingers) vanish.. (FD(?): mmm) ..into nothing. Because that’s exactly what it was like.

William Tyrrells foster parents full NSW police interview April 17 2015

 

[SleepyJoe]

The words used when FM described the time of W's disappearance have always bothered me. Who says, 'moved him on'? Moved him on to what? Moved him on to where? Moved him on to whom? Moved him on for what purpose? Moved him on why? Moved him on how? Wouldn't it be more .... usual... to, rather, say something like, 'someone just took him', if it was believed he had been taken as opposed to lost, or found while perhaps toddling down the road? Why would one immediately think or assume that W was 'moved on'?

This is directly out of the mouth of FM during her 'police interview', this paragraph starts approx 6:18. Note this 'police interview' is available from other sources as well:

FM: I thought that immediately. I had a vision in my head, I don’t know why, but I have a vision in my head, somebody.. I’d.. I can’t explain it.. somebody reached over and I sort of feel like they’ve gone clump on his shoulders, picked him up and moved him on, because to me that’s the only way, it’s the only way I can explain for him not to be there. I’d, I’d, I’m, I don’t, I don’t get it. I don’t.. how can a little boy, how can a 3 year old boy just (snaps fingers) vanish.. ((FD(?): mmm) ..into nothing. Because that’s exactly what it was like.

William Tyrrells foster parents full NSW police interview April 17 2015

Totally agree, it is very odd language.

 

[Akai]

This certainly was the case that broke him, although there was a long lead up to it, including events in his turbulent private life.

GJ was in charge of Rosann but he had a team of detectives under him, and they had their own opinions about what may have happened to William and who, if anyone, might have been involved.

In his book I Catch Killers he admits that, towards the end, he was becoming increasingly isolated because of his style and his opinions as to who to target as likely suspects and to what degree.

Throughout his police career, GJ burnt a few bridges and created some internal enemies who, once in positions of power, were not averse to seeing GJ out of the force, one way or another.

<modsnip: Hearsay/rumor not allowed>

I don't doubt that GJ burnt bridges and had enemies - he would have to have - and that people may have been out to get him, but nobody forced him to illegally record a POI and hound the guy until his life was destroyed even though he had nothing to do with it. Police abusing their powers like that is one of the most dangerous things that can happen.

 

[JBowie]

I don't doubt that GJ burnt bridges and had enemies - he would have to have - and that people may have been out to get him, but nobody forced him to illegally record a POI and hound the guy until his life was destroyed even though he had nothing to do with it. Police abusing their powers like that is one of the most dangerous things that can happen.

From reading his autobio, I get the strong impression that, throughout his life, no one apart from himself forced GJ to do anything.

When it comes to work dedication there's driven and then there's manic and, towards his end, I'd say it was the latter.

 

[JBowie]

Totally agree, it is very odd language.

I have a problem with this whole bit "gone clump on his shoulders, picked him up and moved him on"

To me it almost suggests lifting a dead weight.

 

[JLZ]

I have a problem with this whole bit "gone clump on his shoulders, picked him up and moved him on"

To me it almost suggests lifting a dead weight.

To me it sounds like a deus ex machina playing chess with our little world.

 

[iiiii's]

To me it sounds like a deus ex machina playing chess with our little world.

!!!

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

I have a problem with this whole bit "gone clump on his shoulders, picked him up and moved him on"

To me it almost suggests lifting a dead weight.

There were a few odd sayings by the FFFC, “he might have hit his head and can’t hear me” , or “I heard what I thought was a scream in the bush, then thought, he can’t be here, so I left”, and the way she said he crashed twice into the garden bed then the sentence shoots off into describing 2 cars parked in the street, to which what I’ve read so far the neighbours can’t recall

 

[JBowie]

Is it possible the Crime Commission was related to something else? The media have been wrong in their assumptions before.

Yes, it is possible, however, with a number of journos suggesting -- and at least one even asserting* -- that it is WT case related, and the fact that reportedly Rosann detectives laid the charges, it seems a pretty good bet that it is related to the WT case.

(*) I've emailed that journo asking him how he knows that it is definitely related to the WT case. I don't really expect an answer, but if I get one I'll say so here.

 

[Couldbe]

Question on the 9.30am departure time from the house by MFC.

Mobile phone records have shown that William’s foster father left his mother-in-law’s home in Kendall at 9.30am on Friday, September 12, 2014. (https://www.news.com.au/national/ns...d/news-story/6983c0a44392f8599514e4b5c8a56f04)

Does anyone know exactly how this time, via his mobile phone records, would have been established?

I am wondering how accurate this departure time is; e.g. could he have left a bit later / or a bit earlier?

Time is of the essence in establishing the correct time of his departure, and whether MFC and FFC were lying about whether MFC was there when FFC said she took that iconic photo of William with her camera.

 

[Akai]

There were a few odd sayings by the FFFC, “he might have hit his head and can’t hear me” , or “I heard what I thought was a scream in the bush, then thought, he can’t be here, so I left”, and the way she said he crashed twice into the garden bed then the sentence shoots off into describing 2 cars parked in the street, to which what I’ve read so far the neighbours can’t recall

The scream in the bush scenario really stood out to me. A child has just gone missing, you are searching for him, you hear a child scream in the bushes but you think, "Nah, probably not relevant"? I have tried and tried to understand the thought patterns there, but I cannot. I think I'd be pummelling into the bush at a rate of knots yelling or, if I didn't think that was the primary focus (as she claimed) I'd at least send someone else in there straight away. I just don't think it happened at all.

 

[SouthAussie]

The scream in the bush scenario really stood out to me. A child has just gone missing, you are searching for him, you hear a child scream in the bushes but you think, "Nah, probably not relevant"? I have tried and tried to understand the thought patterns there, but I cannot. I think I'd be pummelling into the bush at a rate of knots yelling or, if I didn't think that was the primary focus (as she claimed) I'd at least send someone else in there straight away. I just don't think it happened at all.

I think some of the details have been missed ....


She said the noise came from within reeds and tall grass near where she was frantically looking for William in his Spider-Man suit.

“It was like a scream when child hurts themselves unexpectedly,” she told the court on the second day of the inquest into the missing toddler’s disappearance.

“There’s a scream. It was quick, it was high-pitched and it was sharp.

“The noise came from the direction of the reeds and that really tall grass.

“I went walking through, went on top of that grassy knoll.

“I got into the bush and I thought I can’t see any red.

“I thought, maybe I imagined it. Maybe it was a bird.”

https://www.kidspot.com.au/parentin...r/news-story/0717e60c0018286fe8f373f130e6dc93

 

[Akai]

I think some of the details have been missed ....


She said the noise came from within reeds and tall grass near where she was frantically looking for William in his Spider-Man suit.

“It was like a scream when child hurts themselves unexpectedly,” she told the court on the second day of the inquest into the missing toddler’s disappearance.

“There’s a scream. It was quick, it was high-pitched and it was sharp.

“The noise came from the direction of the reeds and that really tall grass.

“I went walking through, went on top of that grassy knoll.

“I got into the bush and I thought I can’t see any red.

“I thought, maybe I imagined it. Maybe it was a bird.”

https://www.kidspot.com.au/parentin...r/news-story/0717e60c0018286fe8f373f130e6dc93

Not at all. She never investigated it beyond a cursory look; part way through she decided it was irrelevant and turned around. So she either didn't bother to investigate a child screaming with any sort of thoroughness while we are led to believe she was desperate to find William or she just created a memory of the whole thing that didn't exist.

 

[Tessi V]

First time poster therefore I hope my disclosed sources aren't against WS regulations, so please inform if they are.
I've enjoyed reading the many different viewpoints and counterarguments on here regardless of which side of the fence people sit on. I'm as puzzled as most and don't really hold any opinions or theories on suspected persons who may have played a role in William's disappearance.

I've found two older articles and was actually curious if there are any more recent than 2019 (for a couple of reasons), as 1) the wording used by FM is that what she heard "felt" like a scream and 2) it doesn't include anything about the drive, which I've read a lot about in discussions.
TIA

William Tyrrell's mother thought she heard toddler scream, inquest told

Evidence will show William Tyrrell 'was likely taken', inquest told