Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #13

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
If, as you say, the parent(s) is currently 'meeting their requirements' regarding the younger children, why wouldn't the older children be returned to them?

If there was a permanent adoption imminent, wouldn't the parent(s) be fighting this?

It doesn't seem right for a reformed parent(s) not to be able to regain custody of their children.

Maybe because having the older kids returned to the home would be to much for the mother to cope with, four babies under five is a lot to deal with, more so if you where not able to cope when you only had two.
 
I have wondered if BS was primarily interested in William's sister, and went to the house not with a plan to take her, but just keeping the possibility open in the back of his mind. Maybe he was just going to scope it out or see if the kids were outside or if he could get access to her. Then a perfect (well, perfect for his sick plans) opportunity presented itself that allowed him to snatch William instead.

BS then gives William to someone, maybe someone in a pedophile ring, or maybe just a pedophile friend.

All of this is if BS is guilty. No real reason to think this--mostly just his alleged history with young girls, connection to a pedophile, and the pedo ring in the area.
 
It does seem to be an extreme description of a witness, particularly considering her family history. Just because somebody suffers from a potential mental illness should not therefore imply that evidence given by such a witness is inaccurate or untrue.

IMO

IMO that Judge seems to have been judgmental and not impartial. She was probably very emotional and traumatised herself by her relationship with Spedding and finding out about what he did to the girls. This case could be traumatising her again too. Judges often do not like emotional women and in those days, they often used to assume that the woman made it all up. They seemed to always take the man's side. Also the problem is that over the years, some women have made up stories too in custody cases at least. Let's hope she will be more rational when she is called as a key witness in the trial and is given coaching herself about how to give evidence by someone beforehand.
 
If, as you say, the parent(s) is currently 'meeting their requirements' regarding the younger children, why wouldn't the older children be returned to them?

If there was a permanent adoption imminent, wouldn't the parent(s) be fighting this?

It doesn't seem right for a reformed parent(s) not to be able to regain custody of their children.

Does anyone here know how the fostering system works? If the two eldest children were fostered out, are the bio parents entitled to retain custody of the children? Surely if an adoption is happening, the bio parents MUST have to give their consent?
 
Police ALSO uncovered records held by the NSW FACS concerning persistent sexual abuse in the MID 1980's.

The case where the judge has said the witness is bizarre and he is reasonably satisfied abuse by BS and another woman did not occur - IMO could well be before the 1987 allegations that have medical evidence that abuse did occur.

The judge said the woman had a propensity to make allegations against men of various kinds.

Well I am not going to make any judgement on this woman until I hear the evidence.While the witness can not be named it could be presumed that her brother is a paedophile and her ex-partner is an accused paedophile.
There is medical evidence to confirm the 2 girls have been sexually abused during April and May 1987 ... just maybe there was ongoing abuse. IMO

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...h-three-children/story-e6frgczx-1227322290523

....and she was probably subjected to domestic violence herself!
 
Maybe because having the older kids returned to the home would be to much for the mother to cope with, four babies under five is a lot to deal with, more so if you where not able to cope when you only had two.

That chaps my behind a bit if that's true. I have 5 kids under 7 and wouldn't change a thing, and if God forbid I had two taken off me, I'd fight tooth and nail to get them back no matter the cost (though I'd never put myself in that position anyway, of having my kids removed, were they removed from her or did she give them up? ) If she couldn't cope with having all of them back with her, she shouldn't have had kids.
 
Ksk when parole is revoked, is an arrest warrant issued? Is there any possibility that bail was revoked late jan then hillsley wasn't taken back to jail for 3-4 weeks?

Could he have been laying low, maybe in a friends caravan?

JH had a gambling problem so money was probably tight so i could see someone like that living in a caravan
Would love to know the date he actually went back to jail?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
That chaps my behind a bit if that's true. I have 5 kids under 7 and wouldn't change a thing, and if God forbid I had two taken off me, I'd fight tooth and nail to get them back no matter the cost (though I'd never put myself in that position anyway, of having my kids removed, were they removed from her or did she give them up? ) If she couldn't cope with having all of them back with her, she shouldn't have had kids.


Not saying her, but some people shouldnt be allowed to breed. Sadly not all mothers would fight for their kids, some put their own needs first, drinking, drugs etc. My kids where my life when they where babies, little people, even know as young adults i would drop everything to be there for them.
 
JH had a gambling problem so money was probably tight so i could see someone like that living in a caravan
Would love to know the date he actually went back to jail?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Please provide a link where it says he had a gambling problem - he has problems yes but I haven't seen anything about a gambling problem.
 
Thanks for that everyone - I obviously have to stop skim reading :)
 
If, as you say, the parent(s) is currently 'meeting their requirements' regarding the younger children, why wouldn't the older children be returned to them?

If there was a permanent adoption imminent, wouldn't the parent(s) be fighting this?

It doesn't seem right for a reformed parent(s) not to be able to regain custody of their children.

This is something I have always questioned but it happens a lot. Plenty of stories around of children in abusive situations where they take the child reported but not the others. Not uncommon unfortunately. And perhaps the bio parents were fighting this or perhaps they decided William had a strong bond with new family or was better off in new family. The whole bio/foster thing though I feel has been investigated and irrelevant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Exactly Soso. Yet O'Brien (BS's solicitor) is inferring that the real victims, the little girls BS's is alleged to have raped and assaulted, were lying, having been tutored and coached in what to say. So where did the horrific injuries come from? Oh that's right, from Jeffrey Hillsley, who just happened to be in jail when those injuries occurred in 1987.

If it was proven that JH was in Gaol at that time then why did the judge parole him saying there was questions about who abused the children?

Obviously ether the dates don't match or the medical evidence does not prove an exact date. Judges don't just make these decisions on a whim.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
57
Guests online
1,809
Total visitors
1,866

Forum statistics

Threads
602,012
Messages
18,133,242
Members
231,206
Latest member
habitsofwaste
Back
Top