Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #18

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
The same real estate office and agent are being used for 48 Benaroon Drive as 35 Benaroon Drive. I wonder who helped do GM's sale. I have always thought someone did a clean sweep of the web for the GM to help maintain her privacy because of this case but now I'm wondering if there is anything in her real estate campaign that could tie in with WT's disappearance. A bit like when articles are not accessible anymore.
 
Could the sale of 48 Benaroon at this time be a rouse by police?
 
Makara said:
Welcome Andromedia13. At the age of three, which William was when he disappeared, I really don't think he would have even understood what a drug deal was.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the welcome,just trying to catch up.From the perspective of the dealers or other reason,they might have thought it best to keep him quiet.Its puzzling why the cars have not been mentioned before,as usually all info is given at the time.I guess the LE know a lot we don't.
 
Bohemian said:
When Judge Flannery talks about 'representative counts' and 'parts of a course of conduct' he's referring to the fact that there were more sexual assaults of the particular child (ie, his 11 year old female victim) by AJ than the charges brought against him, is all I can gather; but I'm no lawyer.

Australian Government, Australian Law Reform Commission, Section 25, Sexual Offences, Persistent sexual abuse of a child:

"For example, in the revised South Australian provision, reference to ‘persistent sexual abuse of a child’ was replaced with ‘persistent sexual exploitation of a child’. The offence now focuses on acts of sexual exploitation that comprise a course of conduct, rather than requiring a series of separate particularised offences."

https://www.alrc.gov.au/publications/25. Sexual Offences/persistent-sexual-abuse-child#_ftn125

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), Section 66EA, 'Persistent sexual abuse of a child':

"(1) A person who, on 3 or more separate occasions occurring on separate days during any period, engages in conduct in relation to a particular child that constitutes a sexual offence is liable to imprisonment for 25 years.

(2) It is immaterial whether or not the conduct is of the same nature, or constitutes the same offence, on each occasion.

(3) It is immaterial that the conduct on any of those occasions occurred outside New South Wales, so long as the conduct on at least one of those occasions occurred in New South Wales.

(4) In proceedings for an offence against this section, it is not necessary to specify or to prove the dates or exact circumstances of the alleged occasions on which the conduct constituting the offence occurred."

http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act/ca190082/s66ea.html
Click to expand...

I am no lawyer either Bohemian ... google is great.:)

A "representative" count is a single charge representing more than one offence of an identical nature, that is to say, the charge represents more than one offence of the kind alleged. A representative count is also referred to as a "sample" count.

A representative count alleges the commission of an offence in circumstances where that offence is representative of other offences of an identical nature which have also been committed.

For example, where an accused person indecently assaults a victim over a period of 1 month, but the complainant is uncertain as to exactly how many times the conduct occurred other than to say it occurred more than once, the prosecution may allege a single charge of indecent assault that acts as a specimen of the more systematic pattern of conduct alleged by the complainant.

http://www.judicialcollege.vic.edu.au/eManuals/SAM/index.htm#29223.htm

I found the strict contact conditions interesting however.

Types of protective custody: normal and strict

http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/st/st21
 
perkerkel said:
Wow! Some really interesting semantics going on! Thanks for those quotes from AJ's court appearance so so" . Love the house plan richieswan... So much easier to make sense of who was where, and the video collection. The collection of links is also great, thanks Makara. It will save me masses of my precious 15GB not having to trawl back through pages!
I've been thinking for a while about the eccentricities of the case as we are able to view it and Puggle, your post about what we do and don't know gives me the 'cojones' to share my thoughts.
This case is so tied up in the exposure of the paedophile ring. It's so valuable to the police to have the public focussing so strongly on odd behaviours and suspicious people in the area and the image of little William in people's minds is so important to it. What if.... There is some knowledge that he is okay even though not with the family that wants him back...but rather than the police going in and grabbing him, they are playing a game with the permission of the FM and FF in order to continue exposing this ring that has the potential to harm so many children over time.
What if these are two investigations going on?
It's also really hard to type my other thought...if they had evidence that William had already passed away then a similar event scenario may exist with the family allowing the investigation to continue to unpeeled the layers of evil and keep other children safe in the future.
There I said it!
My opinion only but what do you think?
Hope there's no typos cos I have to go to work!
Click to expand...

Agree. I think under the circumstances, most would do the same. Look at the Morecombes and how they continue to fight for other kids. I think most of us are here on this forum for similar reasons. We talk a lot about organ donation but would a scenario like this be so very different?
 
Original real estate lounge room pics of 35 are no where to be found now....?
 
sosocurious said:
I am no lawyer either Bohemian ... google is great.:)

A "representative" count is a single charge representing more than one offence of an identical nature, that is to say, the charge represents more than one offence of the kind alleged. A representative count is also referred to as a "sample" count.

A representative count alleges the commission of an offence in circumstances where that offence is representative of other offences of an identical nature which have also been committed.

For example, where an accused person indecently assaults a victim over a period of 1 month, but the complainant is uncertain as to exactly how many times the conduct occurred other than to say it occurred more than once, the prosecution may allege a single charge of indecent assault that acts as a specimen of the more systematic pattern of conduct alleged by the complainant.

http://www.judicialcollege.vic.edu.au/eManuals/SAM/index.htm#29223.htm

I found the strict contact conditions interesting however.

Types of protective custody: normal and strict

http://www.judcom.nsw.gov.au/publications/st/st21
Click to expand...

AJ apparently assaulted his victim over a period of 2 years, yes? Or was that PB? I wonder if the AVO listed on his record was to do with contacting his victim or her family from jail(?) now. May 2015 was the date of charge, I think (as usual, don't quote me :) ) AJ's had no problem intimidating and assaulting police before...
 
Wexford said:
Agree. I think under the circumstances, most would do the same. Look at the Morecombes and how they continue to fight for other kids. I think most of us are here on this forum for similar reasons. We talk a lot about organ donation but would a scenario like this be so very different?
Click to expand...

Not at all. Good analogy. I would do the same (and more) to protect any one who is vulnerable, including animals, from being preyed upon by those psychopaths. I'd like to do more (in my darkest fantasies) but let's not go into that here...I can scare myself sometimes...
 
MOD ALERT: It's time to move on with the sleuthing of 35 Benaroon Drive. Comparing the interior to that of the grandmother's house is ridiculous! There is no indication that this property or the owners, past and present are part of the investigation. Its close proximity to the grandmother's house is of interest but so are all of the other properties in the street, which the police have investigated many times over. If you find anything you think may be relevant to the investigation, contact Crimestoppers. 1800 333 000.

https://nsw.crimestoppers.com.au/
 
perkerkel said:
Wow! Some really interesting semantics going on! Thanks for those quotes from AJ's court appearance so so" . Love the house plan richieswan... So much easier to make sense of who was where, and the video collection. The collection of links is also great, thanks Makara. It will save me masses of my precious 15GB not having to trawl back through pages!
I've been thinking for a while about the eccentricities of the case as we are able to view it and Puggle, your post about what we do and don't know gives me the 'cojones' to share my thoughts.
This case is so tied up in the exposure of the paedophile ring. It's so valuable to the police to have the public focussing so strongly on odd behaviours and suspicious people in the area and the image of little William in people's minds is so important to it. What if.... There is some knowledge that he is okay even though not with the family that wants him back...but rather than the police going in and grabbing him, they are playing a game with the permission of the FM and FF in order to continue exposing this ring that has the potential to harm so many children over time.
What if these are two investigations going on?
It's also really hard to type my other thought...if they had evidence that William had already passed away then a similar event scenario may exist with the family allowing the investigation to continue to unpeeled the layers of evil and keep other children safe in the future.
There I said it!
My opinion only but what do you think?
Hope there's no typos cos I have to go to work!
Click to expand...

To be honest I can't see the first scenario .... and it wouldn't be their decision to make (FM &FD).

The same stumbling block that has constraints on them from coming out publicly showing their faces and real names..... they would be the ones calling the shots and even if it were to help uncover more sinister individuals - an agency such as them couldn't risk that under any circumstances......as their sole purpose is to look out for the individual child's interest.

Your second scenario could be possible though.....???
 
MOD ALERT: The posting of images and information from subscription only websites is off limits here. This includes Nearmap. There are plenty of freely available websites that will give you the same information, including Google Maps, Google Earth, Six Maps NSW to name a few. Please include a link or state the source of any images or information you post.

Thank you.
 
Furthering a train of thought of scenarios .....trying to understand the investigation.

I'm going to have to go with what the police have essentially been telling us is the truth or at least the version of the truth we are allowed to know so far.

I try to forget the media spin on some things (cause we know they get it wrong)....but taking the generalised story that police have played out.

Someone that either lives in Benaroon, was visiting Benaroon or had reason to be working legit or otherwise in Benaroon ..... stumbled across William and took that opportunity to snatch him.

The Key POI's that the police have so far given us are Bill Spedding and Tony Jones

Bill Spedding and Tony Jones Know each other, they used to be neighbours back in Wellington.
Did they have further contact since both moving closer to the Haven area? - that is exactly what police are suggesting...through an association of a breakaway Grandparents support group....and it was more than hinted...they suspected some paedophilic behaviour amongst some of those members....Two of which have now been proven in a court of Law to have indeed been paedophiles.

Could it even be conceivable that Tony Jones after being kicked out of his family home asked Bill for some accommodation between the time of being kicked out until his court appearance on the 27th September 2014 - where he pleaded guilty. (Maybe his office - Hence a single mattress).

Now we know Tony Jones is thief ... is it possible that this was another mutual interest between the two.....Tony - Steals .... Bill (Illegally - in the past) had resold stolen items through his former Pawn Broking business???..... That would have been a mutually agreeable situation ???.

Having already been to Benaroon to inspect the washing machine did Bill think of his mate when he drove into this very quiet street??... Did he mention to Nana what a lovely area she lived in and strike up a conversation. Could Nana have mentioned about her neighbours being away??..Did Bill notice that apart from Nana's house...there would only be one other neighbour that would be afforded a view onto the home that was empty.

I can visualise a scenario where Tony has been told by Bill of the house where some people are away on holidays....I can see the possibility of Tony and another acquaintance having gone to Benaroon to scope out the area/case the house and surroundings....or even just flat out Rob it that day.

What part Bill played that exact day ??? ....

I can also see (although sickening) a paedophile and well seasoned criminal that is out on Bail...taking an opportunity when it presents itself ....he after all has been deprived his source of paedophilic pleasure. Going by his 90 plus wrap sheet ...one can only assume he is the type to take and do whatever he pleases whenever he pleases.

Was Bill there??? I still can't figure that out....but did he know something was going to be happening in Benaroon Drive that morning?? ....he did IMO

If he was there ..... good reason for him to not admit it.

If he wasn't there... what could stop him from telling what he did know ....blackmail/intimidation??

If Tony had been staying at Bills office (didn't Bill visit his office that morning??) No need for phone conversations if people are meeting in person - would be no need for phone contact during the time at Benaroon if they Travelled together or followed each other in seperate vehicles.

If one or the other or even another accomplice took William was he taken Back to the Office??
Would it be possible at that time of day (morning) to hide and take him upstairs to the office??
Is there back stair access off the main street to the office??

If he was held in the office is it possible that when Tony Knew he'd have to front court on the 27th, that he then somehow made arrangements with a couple (at a caravan park) to then take William - Hence the Caravan Park being searched following reports of a child crying from the 28th of September till ? 9th October.

Where to from there and with whom??

How does the Bush search fit into this scenario?

Detractors: If they found any forensic evidence of William being in the office or anyone of the vehicles so far searched, surely that person would have been arrested by now?
Would a paedophile with known attraction to girls, take a boy?

Questions: Arrested for what? forensic evidence to what? What is proven apart from William having been in a car or the office...... certainly damaging...and probably adequate to build a circumstantial case.... but does it prove what has happened to William or where he is?? Is it possible that a paedophile with known attraction to girls possibly have preference to both sexes? or could it also be possible they see the child as a commodity to be traded with likeminded individuals in order to acquire access to their preference through favours?

Police Focus: If their main goal is to find William...to find out what has happened to him, would it not be logical for them to keep all their options open for as long as they can to achieve their ultimate goal/focus ?? .... hence my previous analogy of why bust the single drug dealer ...when you can bust the whole operation.

I think I did find evidence a few weeks back that Police do have the discretional powers of when to charge someone (at a time that suits them - and furthers the investigators) and that makes perfect sense to me.... I think that can also be seen in the fact that police only decided to charge Bill with the historical sex claims in April even though they were aware of the allegations as far back as January...

Sorry for the long ramble .... I needed an excuse to sit down for a bit.... feel free to pick apart..
 
Great post Puggle, thank you. One thing to bear in mind is that if the police believe or have information that William is alive, they would be busting down doors to get him. Their first priority in this case is William and his safety. They wouldn't hold off so that they can catch a few pedophiles who may be involved.

If the police believe or have information that William is deceased then they may use strategy to round up and arrest anyone and everyone involved.

Puggle said:
Furthering a train of thought of scenarios .....trying to understand the investigation.

I'm going to have to go with what the police have essentially been telling us is the truth or at least the version of the truth we are allowed to know so far.

I try to forget the media spin on some things (cause we know they get it wrong)....but taking the generalised story that police have played out.

Someone that either lives in Benaroon, was visiting Benaroon or had reason to be working legit or otherwise in Benaroon ..... stumbled across William and took that opportunity to snatch him.

The Key POI's that the police have so far given us are Bill Spedding and Tony Jones

Bill Spedding and Tony Jones Know each other, they used to be neighbours back in Wellington.
Did they have further contact since both moving closer to the Haven area? - that is exactly what police are suggesting...through an association of a breakaway Grandparents support group....and it was more than hinted...they suspected some paedophilic behaviour amongst some of those members....Two of which have now been proven in a court of Law to have indeed been paedophiles.

Could it even be conceivable that Tony Jones after being kicked out of his family home asked Bill for some accommodation between the time of being kicked out until his court appearance on the 27th September 2014 - where he pleaded guilty. (Maybe his office - Hence a single mattress).

Now we know Tony Jones is thief ... is it possible that this was another mutual interest between the two.....Tony - Steals .... Bill (Illegally - in the past) had resold stolen items through his former Pawn Broking business???..... That would have been a mutually agreeable situation ???.

Having already been to Benaroon to inspect the washing machine did Bill think of his mate when he drove into this very quiet street??... Did he mention to Nana what a lovely area she lived in and strike up a conversation. Could Nana have mentioned about her neighbours being away??..Did Bill notice that apart from Nana's house...there would only be one other neighbour that would be afforded a view onto the home that was empty.

I can visualise a scenario where Tony has been told by Bill of the house where some people are away on holidays....I can see the possibility of Tony and another acquaintance having gone to Benaroon to scope out the area/case the house and surroundings....or even just flat out Rob it that day.

What part Bill played that exact day ??? ....

I can also see (although sickening) a paedophile and well seasoned criminal that is out on Bail...taking an opportunity when it presents itself ....he after all has been deprived his source of paedophilic pleasure. Going by his 90 plus wrap sheet ...one can only assume he is the type to take and do whatever he pleases whenever he pleases.

Was Bill there??? I still can't figure that out....but did he know something was going to be happening in Benaroon Drive that morning?? ....he did IMO

If he was there ..... good reason for him to not admit it.

If he wasn't there... what could stop him from telling what he did know ....blackmail/intimidation??

If Tony had been staying at Bills office (didn't Bill visit his office that morning??) No need for phone conversations if people are meeting in person - would be no need for phone contact during the time at Benaroon if they Travelled together or followed each other in seperate vehicles.

If one or the other or even another accomplice took William was he taken Back to the Office??
Would it be possible at that time of day (morning) to hide and take him upstairs to the office??
Is there back stair access off the main street to the office??

If he was held in the office is it possible that when Tony Knew he'd have to front court on the 27th, that he then somehow made arrangements with a couple (at a caravan park) to then take William - Hence the Caravan Park being searched following reports of a child crying from the 28th of September till ? 9th October.

Where to from there and with whom??

How does the Bush search fit into this scenario?

Detractors: If they found any forensic evidence of William being in the office or anyone of the vehicles so far searched, surely that person would have been arrested by now?
Would a paedophile with known attraction to girls, take a boy?

Questions: Arrested for what? forensic evidence to what? What is proven apart from William having been in a car or the office...... certainly damaging...and probably adequate to build a circumstantial case.... but does it prove what has happened to William or where he is?? Is it possible that a paedophile with known attraction to girls possibly have preference to both sexes? or could it also be possible they see the child as a commodity to be traded with likeminded individuals in order to acquire access to their preference through favours?

Police Focus: If their main goal is to find William...to find out what has happened to him, would it not be logical for them to keep all their options open for as long as they can to achieve their ultimate goal/focus ?? .... hence my previous analogy of why bust the single drug dealer ...when you can bust the whole operation.

I think I did find evidence a few weeks back that Police do have the discretional powers of when to charge someone (at a time that suits them - and furthers the investigators) and that makes perfect sense to me.... I think that can also be seen in the fact that police only decided to charge Bill with the historical sex claims in April even though they were aware of the allegations as far back as January...

Sorry for the long ramble .... I needed an excuse to sit down for a bit.... feel free to pick apart..
Click to expand...
 
Puggle said:
To be honest I can't see the first scenario .... and it wouldn't be their decision to make (FM &FD).

The same stumbling block that has constraints on them from coming out publicly showing their faces and real names..... they would be the ones calling the shots and even if it were to help uncover more sinister individuals - an agency such as them couldn't risk that under any circumstances......as their sole purpose is to look out for the individual child's interest.

Your second scenario could be possible though.....???
Click to expand...

There is no way the police would leave a kidnapped child with their kidnappers, no matter how "safe" they might be, just to catch some pedophiles. The health and safety of William would be the number one concern over anything else and he is not safe with someone who kidnapped him. Even children kidnapped by their own parents in custody issues and where there is no intent by that parent to kill the child are immediately removed as soon as they are found. It just wouldn't happen. Can you imagine if they left him with someone they thought was safe and then something happened to him? The police would be in mega deep doodoo.

The only way that strategy would be used is if they actually knew he was already dead, because they have nothing to lose.
 
Originally Posted by perkerkel View Post
Wow! Some really interesting semantics going on! Thanks for those quotes from AJ's court appearance so so" . Love the house plan richieswan... So much easier to make sense of who was where, and the video collection. The collection of links is also great, thanks Makara. It will save me masses of my precious 15GB not having to trawl back through pages!
I've been thinking for a while about the eccentricities of the case as we are able to view it and Puggle, your post about what we do and don't know gives me the 'cojones' to share my thoughts.
This case is so tied up in the exposure of the paedophile ring. It's so valuable to the police to have the public focussing so strongly on odd behaviours and suspicious people in the area and the image of little William in people's minds is so important to it. What if.... There is some knowledge that he is okay even though not with the family that wants him back...but rather than the police going in and grabbing him, they are playing a game with the permission of the FM and FF in order to continue exposing this ring that has the potential to harm so many children over time.
What if these are two investigations going on?
It's also really hard to type my other thought...if they had evidence that William had already passed away then a similar event scenario may exist with the family allowing the investigation to continue to unpeeled the layers of evil and keep other children safe in the future.
There I said it!
My opinion only but what do you think?
Hope there's no typos cos I have to go to work!
Click to expand...
Puggle said:
To be honest I can't see the first scenario .... and it wouldn't be their decision to make (FM &FD).

The same stumbling block that has constraints on them from coming out publicly showing their faces and real names..... they would be the ones calling the shots and even if it were to help uncover more sinister individuals - an agency such as them couldn't risk that under any circumstances......as their sole purpose is to look out for the individual child's interest.

Your second scenario could be possible though.....???
Click to expand...

bbm

I could imagine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is DeKalb County John Doe (2022)?

Members online

... and 138 more.
Total: 2,131 (members: 139, guests: 1,992)

Online statistics

Members online
139
Guests online
1,992
Total visitors
2,131
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
605,459
Messages
18,187,267
Members
233,373
Latest member
NaniMom
Back
Top