Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sep 2014 - #71

[k-mac]

Yes, I do agree. I was thinking that notwithstanding some physical limitations, a parent in her mid-forties is likely to handle a lot of things better than one in her early twenties, by reason of maturity. But if she regresses like this under stress, I'm not so sure. And the contempt expressed chimes with the kicking. I don't think it's a one-off lapse.

HA!
I'm not sure jlz....(women late 40s better parents)
Im there.
no way in hells high water I could handle little kids now.

I am in the JBR camp that Patsy was indeed a late 40s having it all ...making it all happen...frazzled and unable to cope in a moment of dire stress....also relating to toileting issues with Jonbenet.

I see very similar going on here....in so many ways.

 

[JLZ]

HA!
I'm not sure jlz....(women late 40s better parents)
Im there.
no way in hells high water I could handle little kids now.

I am in the JBR camp that Patsy was indeed a late 40s having it all ...making it all happen...frazzled and unable to cope in a moment of dire stress....also relating to toileting issues with Jonbenet.

I see very similar going on here....in so many ways.

I hadn't thought of that comparison--interesting!

 

[Nessie]

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 think the former requires much more vigilance, especially for a kid with a propensity to run towards daddy’s car.

 

[LIBPOP]

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 think the former requires much more vigilance, especially for a kid with a propensity to run towards daddy’s car.

I agree. Even just to watch for snakes

 

[seekingjustice**]

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 think the former requires much more vigilance, especially for a kid with a propensity to run towards daddy’s car.

So true, I feel it was a very minimizing statement to make.

Parents and carers of children have a responsibility to keep children safe. Preschool children are active and curious and situations can become unsafe very quickly which is why pre-schools supervise the children constantly. Active supervision is key to keeping pre school children safe. I don't understand why there wasn't a set of eyes kept on William the whole time that he was in the yard.

 

[Curiouser+Curiouser]

If so, it's not himself he's excusing. He wasn't there.

Unless the timeline is quite different. If we imagine for a moment that everything the family has said is unreliable, it potentially paints a different picture.

An accident or lashing out could have happened during the night or very early. Then they would be working out what to do, planning, making things seem ‘normal’ before raising the alarm.

We have him on camera in the maccas, a disputed photo in the morning, that’s it. The grandma was perhaps purposefully vague and no one heard from L afaik so if the two witnesses are covering, there’s a lot more wriggle room.

Just speculation obviously

 

[SouthAussie]

We have him on camera in the maccas, a disputed photo in the morning, that’s it. The grandma was perhaps purposefully vague and no one heard from L afaik so if the two witnesses are covering, there’s a lot more wriggle room.

There is no way those photos are still under dispute since their re-examination was ordered two years ago.

I would think that the FPs would have been charged for 'lying' about them, if the photos were an issue at the Crime Commission hearing.

If some cannot believe the indicators from the DT and The Australian that the photo times have been deemed accurate for 9:37 that morning, then I think the fact that the Crime Commission has not revealed (through charges) a 'lying' problem with the photos is another good indicator.

imo

 

[Warshawski]

The other way around would be a red flag--if he'd been affectionate for a period and then, one would suppose for a reason, developed an aversion.

Seems he had an aversion to her from the get-go, which imo there has to be a reason for. initially I’ve no doubt he would have been desperately missing his mother, quite distraught & hard to settle. Maybe she didn’t engage in any of that, maybe it was JS who did all that ‘caring’, hence the bond. JMO

 

[Warshawski]

A toileting issue would explain the stress of the washing machine not working ……

imo

Seems W had not yet developed night time bladder control, and that‘s not a huge issue for a recently turned 3 year old, particularly a boy - IMO.

perhaps sometimes there’s wet bedding & PJ’s that need washing, so no machine would make things difficult. However, if it was ‘soaking’ situation, I doubt JS would’ve been too keen to share the bed with him !

 

[Burtrito]

IMO nobody see's her as a cold blooded killer.

Self preservation is highly motivating to most human nature.

Accidents are usually caused by some kind of ill intended behaviour.

Add to the mix any combination of mental health issues...pressure....fear....irrational ideals.....loss of control....shame...disappointment....

I think maybe Williams demise revolved around an injury that was caused DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY by FM.
Something that she felt she was in big big trouble.

moo

I’ve wondered the same thing for plenty of years now.

My mind keeps focussing on the mention of William being put in a tree to encourage him to climb it. Sorry I don’t have the direct quote here. 4th paragraph, Page 17 of Missing William Tyrrell.

 

[Couldbe]

I’ve wondered the same thing for plenty of years now.

My mind keeps focussing on the mention of William being put in a tree to encourage him to climb it. Sorry I don’t have the direct quote here. 4th paragraph, Page 17 of Missing William Tyrrell.

IN THEIR WORDS: William Tyrrell's parents talk of the day their boy went missing and the 'living nightmare' they endure

The parents of missing toddler William Tyrrell have spoken for the first time about their son’s disap...

www.9news.com.au

"P: Did you think initially that oh, kids being kids, he’s in a Spiderman uniform, he’s probably just climbing trees?

M: No it’s not William, it’s not William, he doesn’t do that. On that morning, before he went missing, I’d put him in a tree because Mum’s got some good climbing trees, and he was in it, and he said, “No Mummy it’s too high, get me down,” and I said to him “Why, why don’t you try?”, and he said “No Mummy too high, get me down,” so he wouldn’t be in a tree, it’s not in him."

What are your thoughts in relation to this Burtrito?

 

[Burtrito]

IN THEIR WORDS: William Tyrrell's parents talk of the day their boy went missing and the 'living nightmare' they endure

The parents of missing toddler William Tyrrell have spoken for the first time about their son’s disap...

www.9news.com.au

"P: Did you think initially that oh, kids being kids, he’s in a Spiderman uniform, he’s probably just climbing trees?

M: No it’s not William, it’s not William, he doesn’t do that. On that morning, before he went missing, I’d put him in a tree because Mum’s got some good climbing trees, and he was in it, and he said, “No Mummy it’s too high, get me down,” and I said to him “Why, why don’t you try?”, and he said “No Mummy too high, get me down,” so he wouldn’t be in a tree, it’s not in him."

What are your thoughts in relation to this Burtrito?

Thanks for the quote.

I think the tree story could be significant. I also wonder if the mention of slipping and hurting her hand is somehow significant.

It’s all just something that’s caught my attention and I keep pouring over.
Could be nothing…. MOO
What do you think?

 

[Green beans]

IN THEIR WORDS: William Tyrrell's parents talk of the day their boy went missing and the 'living nightmare' they endure

The parents of missing toddler William Tyrrell have spoken for the first time about their son’s disap...

www.9news.com.au

"P: Did you think initially that oh, kids being kids, he’s in a Spiderman uniform, he’s probably just climbing trees?

M: No it’s not William, it’s not William, he doesn’t do that. On that morning, before he went missing, I’d put him in a tree because Mum’s got some good climbing trees, and he was in it, and he said, “No Mummy it’s too high, get me down,” and I said to him “Why, why don’t you try?”, and he said “No Mummy too high, get me down,” so he wouldn’t be in a tree, it’s not in him."

What are your thoughts in relation to this Burtrito?

The tree story stood out to me too, as FM’s tone relaying that story was off. Perhaps because she was being untruthful, or there’s some other reason her tone changed while sharing this.
Whatever the reasoning this stood out to me a lot.

 

[Megnut]

Thanks for the quote.

I think the tree story could be significant. I also wonder if the mention of slipping and hurting her hand is somehow significant.

It’s all just something that’s caught my attention and I keep pouring over.
Could be nothing…. MOO
What do you think?

The tree story stood out to me too, as FM’s tone relaying that story was off. Perhaps because she was being untruthful, or there’s some other reason her tone changed while sharing this.
Whatever the reasoning this stood out to me a lot.

Right there with you.

It felt extraneous.

I think we're getting a picture. Wm was a delightful, affectionate, busy little boy. I get the impression that busy was seen as an imposition --

The nappy. Emptying cupboards. Not just crashing into the garden, but crashing into the garden deliberately. Not playing with the dice  correctly. Rigid much?

Typical three year old behavior!

In light of the newest revelations, we get a glimpse into skewed expectations, unrealistic expections, abusive reactions --

The tree detail niggles me. Why tell that story at all? Why not, Wm just isn't a climber. Or even, at this point, anything's possible, he's got to be somewhere.

It's the height part I can't shake.

In her story, she takes Wm down from the high place.

Is that a brain leak?

She didn't take Wm down from the high place?

if Wm got scolded for unacceptable dice rolling (puhlease), is it possible he took off with thrm? Possibly even pocketing them in every preschooler's favorite pocket -- his mouth -- before running around the corner? How many times had Wm been there? Would he even be aware that the veranda is essentially on ground level at the point of entry but quickly gains elevation? Did he reach the high point and climb upon the rail or even a chair or table? Did she pursue him? Grab him?

Did. He. Bite. Her?

That might explain everything.

A bite because she tried to retrieve errant dice from his mouth.

A bite because he was 3 and she wasn't. And he wanted to get away.

If she was holding him, at chest height, and he bit her --

...

JMO

 

[Green beans]

I’ve just walked out, and I just see nothing. I see nothing, I hear nothing, I’m speechless. I’m walking around in a circle on the spot thinking, where is he, why can’t I see him, and I’m yelling out, “William, where are you, you need to talk to Mummy, tell me where you are, I can’t see you, I can’t hear you, where are you?”, and he was nowhere, and I’m just standing there thinking, how could he just disappear because he just disappeared and I don’t get it, I don’t get it.

This, IMO I felt was FM reliving her shock at finding Williams life “disappearing”
him not making a sound, he wasn’t there anymore, he’d passed- he’d disappeared.

That’s my take. I only wish William to be found and be buried with dignity.

Edited for link

IN THEIR WORDS: William Tyrrell's parents talk of the day their boy went missing and the 'living nightmare' they endure

The parents of missing toddler William Tyrrell have spoken for the first time about their son’s disap...

www.9news.com.au

 

[Couldbe]

Thanks for the quote.

I think the tree story could be significant. I also wonder if the mention of slipping and hurting her hand is somehow significant.

It’s all just something that’s caught my attention and I keep pouring over.
Could be nothing…. MOO
What do you think?

I have noted that William, in the CCTV photo of him being carried around up on the shoulders of MFC, he didn't mind being at that height!

 

[JLZ]

I’ve just walked out, and I just see nothing. I see nothing, I hear nothing, I’m speechless. I’m walking around in a circle on the spot thinking, where is he, why can’t I see him, and I’m yelling out, “William, where are you, you need to talk to Mummy, tell me where you are, I can’t see you, I can’t hear you, where are you?”, and he was nowhere, and I’m just standing there thinking, how could he just disappear because he just disappeared and I don’t get it, I don’t get it.

This, IMO I felt was FM reliving her shock at finding Williams life “disappearing”
him not making a sound, he wasn’t there anymore, he’d passed- he’d disappeared.

That’s my take. I only wish William to be found and be buried with dignity.

Edited for link

IN THEIR WORDS: William Tyrrell's parents talk of the day their boy went missing and the 'living nightmare' they endure

The parents of missing toddler William Tyrrell have spoken for the first time about their son’s disap...

www.9news.com.au

I've done some 'alternative' readings of that passage too, but I actually find it really relatable in the context of what she's supposed to be describing, when a child was right there and within seconds he's not. I've had it happen and it was like that for me.

 

[T-dawg420]

I have noted that William, in the CCTV photo of him being carried around up on the shoulders of MFC, he didn't mind being at that height!
View attachment 350234

That’s really interesting! With the FFC standing next to William and MFC, I doubt she could put William in a higher position in a tree without being on some kind of mechanism to make you stay higher, like a milk crate or a ladder of some kind.

Maybe William felt safe because MFC was holding his legs? As opposed to being lifted into a tree by the FFC? On that, how heavy was William? Does anyone know, cos how high do people think the FFC could have gotten William if she was on the ground herself? I can’t imagine it would be greater than 5/6 feet high?

 

[T-dawg420]

IN THEIR WORDS: William Tyrrell's parents talk of the day their boy went missing and the 'living nightmare' they endure

The parents of missing toddler William Tyrrell have spoken for the first time about their son’s disap...

www.9news.com.au

In this video around 1:30 mark, when the Fosters are asked when was the last time they saw William the FFC answers “that morning, the 12th, at mums place”. I find the next bit strange. The MFC carer then answers “10, about 10:15”.

Then the FFC says “no” to the MFC 10:15 comment. she says it as the interviewer is going onto the next question (the interviewer here is pretty bad imo, he totally misses this “no” comment. He also spoon feeds the answers to the fosters a lot of the time).

Why did the MFC feel the need to comment 10:15 here, when he wasn’t there at that time? And then having the FFC say “No” in a kind of forceful way is a bad look imo.

 

[Curiouskatz11]

I feel that MFC realised the answer of FFC sounded completely inadequate (gives the date only) when clearly the interviewer and viewers would have been interested in the time. The No is interesting - however, unfortunately the interviewer didn’t think so.