As BS said "I" "did nothing to hurt William." Someone else did - but he gave them the information. (IMO)
The other thing is these sickos never think they're hurting the victims. He might be thinking he's not hurting anyone from HIS perspective
As BS said "I" "did nothing to hurt William." Someone else did - but he gave them the information. (IMO)
Can't find the quote now but someone asked about the concrete slab a couple of pages back.
The concrete slab didnt get ripped up as it was put down before WT went missing.
I really think that if BS was guilty of taking WT and the police had evidence from the search of the properties he would of been arrested by now IMO
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Richos Bride - the DA for the shed was approved after he went missing, 26/9/14, so slab was poured after this date.
<modsnip>
Sorry about that Armchair Detective i thought it was poured in the August
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Hmmm... I have wondered this too.I know I've typed this before, but this is another thing that really bugged me about the interview with the parents.
In all other reports, the father says that they phoned him to tell him william was missing, and he raced home. I really cant be bothered finding links now, but i know i did in a previous thread.
Why then, if he'd already been called, would they think he was with dad??
Also, I have always wondered if a different judge might have denied BS bail last week.
I dont think so. The judge can only consider bail on charged acts. If you look at what BS has been charged with (as opposed to what he is a POI for, or what he is being investigated for), bail was inevitable. He has been charged with offences allegedly committed 30 years ago. He has an otherwise clear history. Based on relevant evidence before the court, there is no real risk of reoffending as there hasnt been any other offending for 30 years.
Would that mean the police have found nothing at all on BS in 30 years since the original historical charges? Otherwise they surely would have used it to keep him in prison? Doesn't look too hopeful for a successful outcome for the trial if this is the case.
Hmmm... I have wondered this too.
Sent from my SM-G900I using Tapatalk
From day two police/detectives were door knocking and interviewing residents in Kendal. I was in Albert st minding all my friends kids, while they were all out looking. Over three days detectives/police knocked on houses thee times. Asking questions and re-asking.They took down all peoples names that lived the households, cars, asked residents to name anyone they thought was odd. Asked if they'd seen anything strange the day at went missing. Wt went missing Friday, 4 days later was bin pickup day. The council was told not to pickup anyone in kendalls bins to given the ok. Police come and searched everyone's bins. During the next week someone I know was asked to take his digger (like a tractor for non Aussies) to the rubbish tip at Dunbogan and had to move rubbish piles that had recently been placed there do police could sift thru.
So from day two police were definitely looking into the possibility he had been taken. Even they they didn't say publicly at the time, they definitely were. Police physically searching people's yards in surrounding areas
I dont think so. The judge can only consider bail on charged acts. If you look at what BS has been charged with (as opposed to what he is a POI for, or what he is being investigated for), bail was inevitable. He has been charged with offences allegedly committed 30 years ago. He has an otherwise clear history. Based on relevant evidence before the court, there is no real risk of reoffending as there hasnt been any other offending for 30 years.
Ahhhh autocorrect is a pain!!
. There was certainly enough evidence for the police and magistrate to refuse him bail. But the Supreme Court in its letter-of-the-law way has decided otherwise.
Im a big fan of the letter of the law approach of the Supreme Courts. That's what prevents gross miscarriages of justice.