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

[SLouTh]

If she's already been for a 4 minute drive, plus one minute because they didn't see each other approaching or driving up Benaroon, she must be understating the time William's been missing. That leaves no time at all for searching the house or grounds. He could be accidentally trapped in the washing machine or dryer, or fallen from the balcony and they haven't found him. Has she not searched because she knows where he is? Or is she speaking carelessly about an actually important thing?

Or was the drive later?

Going right back to the first week of the Inquest when Craddock questioned FM about the drive??? Was it clear as to when the drive occurred???? Can anyone recall this information??

Personal opinion only - search house and yard, then use car to search Benaroon and Ellendale, (and Batar Creek Road, in one direction only it appears?), as with large acreage / rural house blocks it is faster by car than by foot ......

On returning back to FGM House with car, then look more intensely in yards, and summons help from neighbors to help search etc....

It appears that FM was back at the house when FF arrived, (is he with you), and when FF told FM to call 000, AMS was there at FGM house for the 000 call...
IMO

 

[Doesitmakesense]

Just an addition to my previous post.

Between 10.35 MFC returns and 10.56 OOO call - that is 21 minutes.

The MFC is looking outside because his logic said that his wife had already searched the immediate area. So he spread out further around the property and the FFC got neighbours involved in searching their properties.

I feel that is a long amount of time before calling OOO.

I don't think that's that long. I think it would be very easy to get to half hour. If just basing it off my own property which in a round about way is similar size and location to FGM. Look inside the house, in backyard, front yard. Next door neighbors on each side, wander up and down the street a bit. I actually think I would probably have looked longed than that before contacting LE because I would think in such a quiet location that they have wandered off, not taken away

 

[Akai]

No, in the FACS vs Smith case (which is what we are discussing, due to the DM article) there were no arguments like that.


Justice Brereton:
"While there is nothing to suggest that disclosure of Julian’s legal status would in any way add value to or enhance the investigation, or otherwise assist in finding Julian – indeed Ms Smith, when asked, was unable to suggest any way in which it would do so .... "
Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services v Smith - NSW Caselaw

Yes. Those arguments were not presented, but it did not mean they did not exist, was what I was getting at. I have never regarded it as Ms Smith's responsibility to do that because her foundation for her argument as to why the status of William's circumstances should be revealed was completely different. It was the police's responsibility to provide a proper analysis about the impact on the investigation whether positive or negative and in my view they should have objectively done so, not taken a particular stance. Moreover, they did not support their stance with real evidence demonstrating that it would actually hinder the investigation. Jubelin made the statement, but on what basis that was actually supported by evidence was not clear.

 

[JLZ]

Going right back to the first week of the Inquest when Craddock questioned FM about the drive??? Was it clear as to when the drive occurred???? Can anyone recall this information??

Personal opinion only - search house and yard, then use car to search Benaroon and Ellendale, (and Batar Creek Road, in one direction only it appears?), as with large acreage / rural house blocks it is faster by car than by foot ......

On returning back to FGM House with car, then look more intensely in yards, and summons help from neighbors to help search etc....

It appears that FM was back at the house when FF arrived, (is he with you), and when FF told FM to call 000, AMS was there at FGM house for the 000 call...
IMO

But, if she's searched house and yard and then driven to the riding school and back before MFC returns, she has to know that it's more than 5 minutes since she saw William.

 

[Akai]

Going right back to the first week of the Inquest when Craddock questioned FM about the drive??? Was it clear as to when the drive occurred???? Can anyone recall this information??

Personal opinion only - search house and yard, then use car to search Benaroon and Ellendale, (and Batar Creek Road, in one direction only it appears?), as with large acreage / rural house blocks it is faster by car than by foot ......

On returning back to FGM House with car, then look more intensely in yards, and summons help from neighbors to help search etc....

It appears that FM was back at the house when FF arrived, (is he with you), and when FF told FM to call 000, AMS was there at FGM house for the 000 call...
IMO

So by the accounts of FM & FF, nobody searched the house until the first police officer arrived when he had a look. FF assumed it had already been checked so he didn't upon arrival, and FM makes no reference to the house being searched inside.

My recollection of the inquest and walk-through video is that she made this drive before police arrived. FF texted her at 10:30am to say he would be home in five minutes, putting his arrival at 10:35am, and police were called at 10:56am, which leaves her 20 minutes to do the drive (enough time) after FF arrives home. However, the implication in media articles (and I say implication because it was not official stated) is that the FGM car was seized late last year because police believe she may have driven it. IF she took a car out after FF arrived home, I would have thought she'd take their car because it would be parked behind FGM's and also because she is familiar with it. That suggests to me that the drive was before FF arrived home. There is enough time for her to have done this. This is my recollection and analysis.

 

[JLZ]

So by the accounts of FM & FF, nobody searched the house until the first police officer arrived when he had a look. FF assumed it had already been checked so he didn't upon arrival, and FM makes no reference to the house being searched inside.

My recollection of the inquest and walk-through video is that she made this drive before police arrived. FF texted her at 10:30am to say he would be home in five minutes, putting his arrival at 10:35am, and police were called at 10:56am, which leaves her 20 minutes to do the drive (enough time) after FF arrives home. However, the implication in media articles (and I say implication because it was not official stated) is that the FGM car was seized late last year because police believe she may have driven it. IF she took a car out after FF arrived home, I would have thought she'd take their car because it would be parked behind FGM's and also because she is familiar with it. That suggests to me that the drive was before FF arrived home. There is enough time for her to have done this. This is my recollection and analysis.

I think the cars were parked in different driveways.

 

[Akai]

I think the cars were parked in different driveways.

I think FF says he "pulled in to the carport". Let me see if I can find that.

 

[JLZ]

I think FF says he "pulled in to the carport". Let me see if I can find that.

I think that's what he did too; and that FGM's car was in or just outside the garage, accessed by the other driveway down the hill.

 

[bfew]

No, in the FACS vs Smith case (which is what we are discussing, due to the DM article) there were no arguments like that.

And in the Aug 2017 appeal case?
Secretary, Department of Family and Community Services v Smith [2017] NSWCA 206 (23 August 2017)

 

[nightrider17]

So going by the FFC -

From 9.37 (photo) - to her drive 10.25? - William - went missing about 10.15???

 

[Akai]

I think that's what he did too; and that FGM's car was in or just outside the garage, accessed by the other driveway down the hill.

Which still in my view means if she had left after FF got home she would have taken their car, not her mother's. (Not that I am responding to you on this, just following on from my other post on the matter in that my analysis is that she went for the drive before FF returned home.)

 

[Akai]

So going by the FFC -

From 9.37 (photo) - to her drive 10.25? - William - went missing about 10.15???

I think she has to be back from her drive by 10:30am because she got the text from FF then and the characterisation of that is that she was at her mother's place when she received the text message. So yes, I'd say 10:25am is the latest she could have been coming back from her drive (assuming it takes 4 minutes to make the return trip and we allow a minute to get into the drive/out of the car and be around the house for when he texts).

 

[nightrider17]

The foster father has been charged with two counts of giving false or misleading evidence to the NSW Crime Commission.

Could this be in relation to the timeline?

 

[Serenanicole]

The foster father has been charged with two counts of giving false or misleading evidence to the NSW Crime Commission.

Could this be in relation to the timeline?

It is possible IMO

 

[JLZ]

I think she has to be back from her drive by 10:30am because she got the text from FF then and the characterisation of that is that she was at her mother's place when she received the text message. So yes, I'd say 10:25am is the latest she could have been coming back from her drive (assuming it takes 4 minutes to make the return trip and we allow a minute to get into the drive/out of the car and be around the house for when he texts).

If she didn't take her phone on the drive the text could have arrived while she was out. Assuming it took MFC 3 minutes to drive from the centre of Kendall, she could have been back from her drive as late 10:32.

 

[Akai]

If she didn't take her phone on the drive the text could have arrived while she was out. Assuming it took MFC 3 minutes to drive from the centre of Kendall, she could have been back from her drive as late 10:32.

Fair point and possibility. I always got the impression from her commentary that she got the text at the time it arrived on her phone and that she was at her mother's when this happened. This was, however, just my impression. And I'll add that all of this commentary excluded the fact that she went for a drive at all, so if she was specifically excluding that information in what she was saying she could also have altered the story about where she was when she got the text to fit in with excluding the drive from the story.

 

[Akai]

The foster father has been charged with two counts of giving false or misleading evidence to the NSW Crime Commission.

Could this be in relation to the timeline?

Could be. It has been stated in the media that mobile phone records show he left the house at 9:30am. We haven't yet been able to ascertain the specifics of this or what it means. It is bizarre in light of the fact that all accounts place him as leaving the house well before 9:30am and returning around 10:30am. As far as I understand it, his meeting would have been going on at 9:30am, the meeting that he was conducting parked outside Lakewood shopping village. So if police can place him as leaving the house at 9:30am then this would definitely call into question his timeline. I don't understand it, though, because surely, surely they would have checked the meeting at the time? It's a pretty easy thing to do.

 

[nightrider17]

So both Foster parents - accused of lying

MFC - 2 counts
FFC - 1 count


The foster father, who police claim 'lied about something we can prove', gave the allegedly false evidence to the secretive NSW Crime Commission late last year.

The details of what exactly is the evidence provided to the NSW Crime Commission by the foster father which police claim is false and misleading are unavailable.
William Tyrrell's foster MOTHER now charged with lying to secretive crime commission | Daily Mail Online

Both charged with assault.
Both have one witness each.

Could the lying/false/misleading information be the same for both foster parents. He has 2 she has 1.

Is misleading - not actually lying - but maybe omitting something or allowing a assumption to be held by police that they could have put right but chose not to/let slide??

They both where in the car???

 

[nightrider17]

Then if they can prove there was deception - what would the purpose of the deception achieve for that individual??

like if he left later - what does that matter. Why would he say he left earlier? What does that achieve.

Lying = especially if they both are lying/omitting etc on the same point - then what would the purpose of that be??

The information has been revealed to the public in bits and pieces.
She's charged
He's charged
He's lying
She's lying
She's assaulted
He's assaulted
Is this all to do with the same piece of information?

Was there someone else visiting another - sibling??

I hope this is just not all smoke and mirrors about nothing.

Obviously assault and stalking is serious and should be thoroughly investigated and dealt with but is the lying just a red herring. MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

So by the accounts of FM & FF, nobody searched the house until the first police officer arrived when he had a look. FF assumed it had already been checked so he didn't upon arrival, and FM makes no reference to the house being searched inside.

She heard him roar, then silence so she raced around the house trying to find him in the yard. She then searched inside the home in every cupboard and under the house.
‘Somebody has taken him’: William Tyrrell’s foster mother shares grief over loss of three-year-old

I hear a roar and then I hear nothing,” she told the court.
She raced around the property, looking in every cupboard and every bush for a sign of his red Spiderman suit.
“William, it’s Mummy. You need to tell me where you are. You need to say something,” the woman recalled through tears.
William Tyrrell inquest: foster mother recalls seeing two cars the morning he disappeared