Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #15

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Karinna said:
(Paraphrased by me from the article):
Spedding stands accused of sexually molesting and assaulting two little girls from Campbelltown in the late 80's. Mr. Spedding's lawyer states a known paedophile was responsible for the attacks.
His lawyer states there was evidence Hillsley came into contact with the girls. The lawyer also states Spedding had been previously investigated and cleared and that the Crown case was a weak one.
Click to expand...

Hi Karinna,
OK I can see where you got the idea now. Indeed that Tele article does say that BS's lawyer said in court that BS had been previously investigated and cleared. I would just like to put this revelation in context though, which may help explain a bit of all the fuss that has been populating the websleuths threads of late. Forgive me if I am wrong, but my impression is that you have only recently started digging deeply into this case and/or joining in websleuths discussions. If this is the case and you have come across this Tele article in the process of your research, then I can see how it is, of course, informing your view. Others of us have been following the case throughout the whole saga of BS being charged with the historical offenses, then it going to a preliminary hearing and the whole bit about Hillsey coming out. So this matter has been poured over with a magnifying glass some time ago, and I can assure you it led to many of us adopting a more open mind towards BS, particularly in relation to the historical charges.

However, importantly, I don't believe there was any other source discussed here which stated that BS had every been previously cleared. Unfortunatley, the Daily Tele is often not to be trusted - it frequently engages in sloppy reporting. So for many ears in this forum, the claim that BS has been cleared of the historical charges is completely new and it would probably take a more primary source than the Daily Tele to convince us! But if you are coming to the case more recently, and have come across this article along the way, and it has subsequently informed your view, I can totally understand that. However unless court documents back up what the Tele is saying they probably have it a bit wrong.
 
<modsnip> I am also hoping the police had checked out all the workers including all the contractors nearby in the area at the time.

I still think this guy who happened to drive through this non traffic quiet road is not new to Benaroon Dr. To say that the abduction is done by a complete stranger/opportunistic, the perpetrator got to be extremely lucky to happen to drive into a road he had never been to, he choose to drive further inside into the street, happened to see WT playing there, and almost immediately think of a flawless abduction plan, all this is just extraordinarily unbelievable coincidence.

A population of less than a thousand, there is a possibility of checking out all the people there.
 
ninjabynight said:
Hi Karinna,
OK I can see where you got the idea now. Indeed that Tele article does say that BS's lawyer said in court that BS had been previously investigated and cleared. I would just like to put this revelation in context though, which may help explain a bit of all the fuss that has been populating the websleuths threads of late. Forgive me if I am wrong, but my impression is that you have only recently started digging deeply into this case and/or joining in websleuths discussions. If this is the case and you have come across this Tele article in the process of your research, then I can see how it is, of course, informing your view. Others of us have been following the case throughout the whole saga of BS being charged with the historical offenses, then it going to a preliminary hearing and the whole bit about Hillsey coming out. So this matter has been poured over with a magnifying glass some time ago, and I can assure you it led to many of us adopting a more open mind towards BS, particularly in relation to the historical charges.

However, importantly, I don't believe there was any other source discussed here which stated that BS had every been previously cleared. Unfortunatley, the Daily Tele is often not to be trusted - it frequently engages in sloppy reporting. So for many ears in this forum, the claim that BS has been cleared of the historical charges is completely new and it would probably take a more primary source than the Daily Tele to convince us! But if you are coming to the case more recently, and have come across this article along the way, and it has subsequently informed your view, I can totally understand that. However unless court documents back up what the Tele is saying they probably have it a bit wrong.
Click to expand...

Thanks for your post, and you are right in what you say, i have only not long ago joined the discussion of this case. It seems that a lot of msm don't always get the articles they write correct and that only serves to confuse the issue.
I am still uncertain from what i have read if William was playing hide and seek with his sister or riding his bike in the driveway when he was abducted?
 
Karinna said:
(Paraphrased by me from the article):
Spedding stands accused of sexually molesting and assaulting two little girls from Campbelltown in the late 80's. Mr. Spedding's lawyer states a known paedophile was responsible for the attacks.
His lawyer states there was evidence Hillsley came into contact with the girls. The lawyer also states Spedding had been previously investigated and cleared and that the Crown case was a weak one.
Click to expand...

Hi Karinna, for reasons I can't go into due to WS rules, I think Hiilsley probably did come into contact with them at some stage, however, that is quite separate to the historical charges with which BS is charged.

I was finally able to get into the article and it seems that the Crown said he was not around when the abuse occurred (in jail), due his parole being revoked in January of that year. I guess when the trial starts, it will be easy to prove one way or the other whether or not he was in jail at the time.

It does worry me though that if BS alleged that Hillsley had done this (according to his lawyer), should he not have gone to LE and reported it? If not, doesn't that make him complicit?

Again, I can't find the link (yes I need to keep better records), but I thought the case did not proceed at that time due to concerns for the children etc, rather than BS being cleared. Oh hang on, was it lack of evidence? Or was it concerns about it being too much for girls at such a tender age? Or both?
 
It seems that the historical abuse charges are related to the two children in the Spedding household, being that Spedding was married to Hillsley's sister, making him Hillsley's brother in law. That being the case the little girl's were either Spedding's biological children or his step children. Maybe that is why he thought it was ok. to contact one of them? It has never been stated in msm to my knowledge that Spedding was their father.
 
Karinna said:
It seems that the historical abuse charges are related to the two children in the Spedding household, being that Spedding was married to Hillsley's sister, making him Hillsley's brother in law. That being the case the little girl's were either Spedding's biological children or his step children. Maybe that is why he thought it was ok. to contact one of them? It has never been stated in msm to my knowledge that Spedding was their father.
Click to expand...

Dan Box &#8207;@DanBox10 Jun 16

Bill Spedding faces child sex charges. The judge has ordered that the identities of his two alleged victims be suppressed.
 
purpleandgreen said:
Hi Karinna, for reasons I can't go into due to WS rules, I think Hiilsley probably did come into contact with them at some stage, however, that is quite separate to the historical charges with which BS is charged.

I was finally able to get into the article and it seems that the Crown said he was not around when the abuse occurred (in jail), due his parole being revoked in January of that year. I guess when the trial starts, it will be easy to prove one way or the other whether or not he was in jail at the time.

It does worry me though that if BS alleged that Hillsley had done this (according to his lawyer), should he not have gone to LE and reported it? If not, doesn't that make him complicit?

Again, I can't find the link (yes I need to keep better records), but I thought the case did not proceed at that time due to concerns for the children etc, rather than BS being cleared. Oh hang on, was it lack of evidence? Or was it concerns about it being too much for girls at such a tender age? Or both?
Click to expand...

Replying to self, again from Telegraph http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...ild-rape-charges/story-fni0cx12-1227316615479

so will paraphrase:

~Police said they didn't prosecute back then because of concerns for the wellbeing of the young victim
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 61 more.
Total: 1,844 (members: 62, guests: 1,782)

Online statistics

Members online
62
Guests online
1,782
Total visitors
1,844
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
601,799
Messages
18,130,053
Members
231,145
Latest member
alicat3
Back
Top