Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #22

[sleepinoz]

OK, thanks for that info, but I would rather ask someone different who has a Page for obvious reasons. MOO

No problem, I was just trying to help the person who originally asked about the date on the posts, not get into anything "obvious" that isn't obvious.

 

[frogwell]

Normally I would agree that the dates are important, in this case it looks like they just tried to backdate a couple of days and got the year wrong - I really don't think there is any significance in the dates except human error.

I'm honestly not meaning to be impudent, but I'm wondering, why are the dates not important to you in this instance, when normally they would be?

 

[frogwell]

Let's just call the whole thing a co-inky-dink. I'm sure there's nothing sinister regarding the error and William did disappear on Friday, 12 September 2014; not before.

Again, I'm asking out of curiosity, what makes you sure there's nothing sinister regarding the error and WT disappeared on the 12/09/14 and not before?

 

[Rayemonde]

Again, I'm asking out of curiosity, what makes you sure there's nothing sinister regarding the error and WT disappeared on the 12/09/14 and not before?

What makes you think there *is* something sinister about it? LE have confirmed the story of when William disappeared and when the "roaring" photo of him was taken, and they have said right from the start that the family have been cleared. I really doubt that he actually disappeared earlier and the family have managed to fool the police, but then accidentally gave the game away on the Facebook page. The simplest explanation is that someone made a mistake on the Facebook page.

 

[frogwell]

What makes you think there *is* something sinister about it? LE have confirmed the story of when William disappeared and when the "roaring" photo of him was taken, and they have said right from the start that the family have been cleared. I really doubt that he actually disappeared earlier and the family have managed to fool the police, but then accidentally gave the game away on the Facebook page. The simplest explanation is that someone made a mistake on the Facebook page.

Well my surprise is at how certain/sure some members are whenever a discrepancy comes up in regards to the FF, if they just said, did or printed something that is questionable. All of it seems to be cleared with a statement LE made very early on in the case which IMOO was not enough time to examine all alibis and evidence available at the time. My questions were honest and not meant to be challenging, of members who I have noticed have really analysed different points as the case so far and are happy to take this point of discrepancy at face value. I would be happy to accept the simplest explanation is that someone made a mistake if anyone who uses a facebook page could show that the "mistaken" data was connected to a backdating issue and not connected to some other type of data, e.g. a time, date stamp for a photo that had been downloaded from a camera. How far would LE get in this case if they had a set attitude to every discrepancy they came across, and dismissed it, cause it didn't fall into line with what they were thinking happened? MOO

 

[sleepinoz]

Again, I'm asking out of curiosity, what makes you sure there's nothing sinister regarding the error and WT disappeared on the 12/09/14 and not before?

Well my surprise is at how certain/sure some members are whenever a discrepancy comes up in regards to the FF, if they just said, did or printed something that is questionable. All of it seems to be cleared with a statement LE made very early on in the case which IMOO was not enough time to examine all alibis and evidence available at the time. My questions were honest and not meant to be challenging, of members who I have noticed have really analysed different points as the case so far and are happy to take this point of discrepancy at face value. I would be happy to accept the simplest explanation is that someone made a mistake if anyone who uses a facebook page could show that the "mistaken" data was connected to a backdating issue and not connected to some other type of data, e.g. a time, date stamp for a photo that had been downloaded from a camera. How far would LE get in this case if they had a set attitude to every discrepancy they came across, and dismissed it, cause it didn't fall into line with what they were thinking happened? MOO

Normally dates are worthy of investigation, in this case the disputed date is almost 3 months prior to William vanishing. I really don't think his disappearance could have been hidden for that long considering he attended day care, had family visits... etc. I think if he had been unseen for that long we would have heard about it by now.

As for the facebook date being connected to "some other type of data e.g. a time, date stamp for a photo that had been downloaded from a camera" - Facebook doesn't display any of this data, the only dates that FB displays is what is entered by a page (as previously explained) or the date and time the post was made.

I am in no way clearing anyone or blaming anyone, by explaining the FB dates in this instance, and I actually think your tending towards 'victim blaming' which is against Websleuths TOS.

There is no "mistaken data" in these posts, it's all there for us all to see.

 

[Bohemian]

Let's just call the whole thing a co-inky-dink. I'm sure there's nothing sinister regarding the error and William did disappear on Friday, 12 September 2014; not before.

I feel it's possible he went missing that date , not so sure about when that photo was taken though.

Again, I'm asking out of curiosity, what makes you sure there's nothing sinister regarding the error and WT disappeared on the 12/09/14 and not before?

Froggy, the reason I think there's nothing sinister about the start date on the 'Where's William?' FB page or the date the photo was taken is because I completed a unit on Forensic Imaging at Uni which included studying digital photographs and the corresponding chain of evidence.

The FF's phones, computers, digital cameras, etc, would have been gone over with a fine-toothed comb by forensic investigators; including imaging and computing experts. If, after those examinations, it's good enough for DI Jubelin and Strike Force Rosann investigators to conclude William's FF can neither be named as POIs nor as suspects; as has been stated consistently over the course of the investigation into his disappearance, then it is good enough for me. That is, unless substantially contradictory information comes to hand.

If you, or anyone else, honestly feels the FB page anomaly would be 'of interest' to investigators, I urge you to contact them via Crimestoppers.

 

[frogwell]

Thanks sleep and bo for your responses. Although the date is 3 months prior to WT's disappearance, if the date is connected to the photo, then maybe that is when that photo was taken. Does not mean he disappeared 3 months ago, just that maybe that image was taken 3 months prior on a visit to Kendall. That and 2 other photos places WT at Kendall on the 12/09/14 outside of any family seeing him there as far as we know. Any questions around that image I am hoping would be gone over with a fine tooth comb. I don't know how all the complex family background could have been found to have no bearing on WT's disappearance so early in the investigation, especially since it is not known what has even happened to him. The options have been narrowed down to lost or possible abduction. There are a few other options. Bo I appreciate your explanation of what you have studied. Just wondering , when I have asked previously, is it easy for investigators to see if an image has been taken of a photo, I don't recall what you have said about that. If it isn't easy to detect, all the fine tooth investigation in the world is not going to find a phone or camera that has been destroyed. However I am just entertaining a line of thinking and I appreciate the explanations for how you arrive at your positions. I'm just thinking about the over 1000 pieces of information that have been logged for this case which is so wild to me considering that no one saw him or anything else that day he disappeared. I think the suggestion about crimestoppers is a fine one. MOO

 

[Eloise]

Froggy, the reason I think there's nothing sinister about the start date on the 'Where's William?' FB page or the date the photo was taken is because I completed a unit on Forensic Imaging at Uni which included studying digital photographs and the corresponding chain of evidence.

The FF's phones, computers, digital cameras, etc, would have been gone over with a fine-toothed comb by forensic investigators; including imaging and computing experts. If, after those examinations, it's good enough for DI Jubelin and Strike Force Rosann investigators to conclude William's FF can neither be named as POIs nor as suspects; as has been stated consistently over the course of the investigation into his disappearance, then it is good enough for me. That is, unless substantially contradictory information comes to hand.

If you, or anyone else, honestly feels the FB page anomaly would be 'of interest' to investigators, I urge you to contact them via Crimestoppers.

There are as yet unnamed POIs. Until every POI is named in the media I'm assuming anybody could be on that list including the FPs.

That said, I don't think they're guilty of anything. At least based on the info we have, FWIW.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[LolaAngelina]

Thanks sleep and bo for your responses. Although the date is 3 months prior to WT's disappearance, if the date is connected to the photo, then maybe that is when that photo was taken. Does not mean he disappeared 3 months ago, just that maybe that image was taken 3 months prior on a visit to Kendall. That and 2 other photos places WT at Kendall on the 12/09/14 outside of any family seeing him there as far as we know. Any questions around that image I am hoping would be gone over with a fine tooth comb. I don't know how all the complex family background could have been found to have no bearing on WT's disappearance so early in the investigation, especially since it is not known what has even happened to him. The options have been narrowed down to lost or possible abduction. There are a few other options. Bo I appreciate your explanation of what you have studied. Just wondering , when I have asked previously, is it easy for investigators to see if an image has been taken of a photo, I don't recall what you have said about that. If it isn't easy to detect, all the fine tooth investigation in the world is not going to find a phone or camera that has been destroyed. However I am just entertaining a line of thinking and I appreciate the explanations for how you arrive at your positions. I'm just thinking about the over 1000 pieces of information that have been logged for this case which is so wild to me considering that no one saw him or anything else that day he disappeared. I think the suggestion about crimestoppers is a fine one. MOO

The photos have been verified as being taken that morning. The police have verified that William was there that morning. These are a few of the only facts we have in this case. Unless of course we jump on the conspiracy bandwagon and say the police are lying and are part of the coverup:gaah:

 

[frogwell]

Police have verified that photos of the roaring image and 2 others were taken at Kendall approx. 1 hour before he was reported as missing on 12/09/14. I'm not saying the police are lying. MOO

 

[frogwell]

There is no "mistaken data" in these posts, it's all there for us all to see.

RSBM

I don't know how else to term it. Others have said, " surely it is a mistake" or "human error". Just going with their lead. MOO

 

[Bohemian]

Thanks sleep and bo for your responses. Although the date is 3 months prior to WT's disappearance, if the date is connected to the photo, then maybe that is when that photo was taken. Does not mean he disappeared 3 months ago, just that maybe that image was taken 3 months prior on a visit to Kendall. That and 2 other photos places WT at Kendall on the 12/09/14 outside of any family seeing him there as far as we know. Any questions around that image I am hoping would be gone over with a fine tooth comb. I don't know how all the complex family background could have been found to have no bearing on WT's disappearance so early in the investigation, especially since it is not known what has even happened to him. The options have been narrowed down to lost or possible abduction. There are a few other options. Bo I appreciate your explanation of what you have studied. Just wondering , when I have asked previously, is it easy for investigators to see if an image has been taken of a photo, I don't recall what you have said about that. If it isn't easy to detect, all the fine tooth investigation in the world is not going to find a phone or camera that has been destroyed. However I am just entertaining a line of thinking and I appreciate the explanations for how you arrive at your positions. I'm just thinking about the over 1000 pieces of information that have been logged for this case which is so wild to me considering that no one saw him or anything else that day he disappeared. I think the suggestion about crimestoppers is a fine one. MOO

BBM.

In the simplest terms, Froggy, there is EXIF data that provides information about when the photo was taken, which device it was taken with and, usually, 'geotagging' which shows where the photo was taken. Each individual device also has a unique 'noise' signature so it would be my guess, although I'm not a techie or an expert in the field, if there was a variation in the background noise in the photos of Williiam and not in any others on the device, that would be a dead giveaway that his photos weren't originals. I hope this makes sense. Crabby can probably give a more detailed technical explanation.

 

[Bohemian]

There are as yet unnamed POIs. Until every POI is named in the media I'm assuming anybody could be on that list including the FPs.

That said, I don't think they're guilty of anything. At least based on the info we have, FWIW.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

You're right, Eloise, but police said 'all of William’s family members have been cleared of any involvement in the boy’s disappearance.'

William Tyrrell search steps up as police pursue links to suspected paedophile ring
Mark Morri and Matthew Benns
The Daily Telegraph/news.com.au
April 18, 2015 12:48am

http://www.news.com.au/national/cri...g/news-story/7C43CBC3D1F4F9E279E081FEE8B38F47

I agree with your final paragraph.

 

[frogwell]

BBM.

In the simplest terms, Froggy, there is EXIF data that provides information about when the photo was taken, which device it was taken with and, usually, 'geotagging' which shows where the photo was taken. Each individual device also has a unique 'noise' signature so it would be my guess, although I'm not a techie or an expert in the field, if there was a variation in the background noise in the photos of Williiam and not in any others on the device, that would be a dead giveaway that his photos weren't originals. I hope this makes sense. Crabby can probably give a more detailed technical explanation.

Thanks for that explanation about the unique noise signature on each device. I don't recall anyone explaining that before. Going with my scenario for a moment, the EXIF data would show the time, the device the image was taken with and possibly the location, all of which there would be nothing to question at the beginning of the investigation. Do you think after they initially garnered that information and the call/msg log that they tested that phone or camera any further when they had the initial confirmation that WT was in Kendall at the time/date he was supposed to be there? MOO

 

[Eloise]

You're right, Eloise, but police said 'all of William’s family members have been cleared of any involvement in the boy’s disappearance.'

William Tyrrell search steps up as police pursue links to suspected paedophile ring
Mark Morri and Matthew Benns
The Daily Telegraph/news.com.au
April 18, 2015 12:48am

http://www.news.com.au/national/cri...g/news-story/7C43CBC3D1F4F9E279E081FEE8B38F47

I agree with your final paragraph.

Yeah they said that but I've seen several cases now where police have said that but then it's been family or the husband or whoever it was they said weren't suspects who actually did it and who are arrested. Until a suspect is named or arrest made I suspect everyone.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

 

[bearbear]

so a photo could be taken in july at a location with a phone, then in september a photo taken of that photo with another phone, in the same location, which would show when checked as photo being taken at that time and date and location? would this be possible? or would it show straight away as false?
this photo seems to be one of the key pieces of evidence william was there that day, and at the beginning verified this, im sure its since been thoroughly investigated and we dont know whether or not any discrepencies have been found, police strategy to leak tiny bits and keep everything close!
where are you little william?

 

[Bohemian]

Thanks for that explanation about the unique noise signature on each device. I don't recall anyone explaining that before. Going with my scenario for a moment, the EXIF data would show the time, the device the image was taken with and possibly the location, all of which there would be nothing to question at the beginning of the investigation. Do you think after they initially garnered that information and the call/msg log that they tested that phone or camera any further when they had the initial confirmation that WT was in Kendall at the time/date he was supposed to be there? MOO

BBM.

I don't know exactly to what extent the familiy's devices were examined as I'm not privvy to the intracacies of Strike Force Rosann's investigations but, I would think that, they would be fairly extensive seeing as a child's life was, and still is, at risk. There are ways and means of making a copy of a device's metadata without corrupting the original as well as, in most cases, being able to access data from the 'cloud'. Is there a slim possibility someone dropped the ball early on in the investigation and manipulated images were overlooked? Yes but, honestly, I think doing that to the extent the images were found to be indisputably 'original' would require someone having extremely high level skills in IT and image manipulation to get past forensic experts; not someone who AFAIK has only been reported as having the ability to set up a VoIP call.

 

[bearbear]

im sure anybody can sue anybody for libel and defamation, but it can be tricky because people also have free speech, we are advised on this forum to quote "moo or my opinion" which maybe gives a little protection?

 

[Bohemian]

Yeah they said that but I've seen several cases now where police have said that but then it's been family or the husband or whoever it was they said weren't suspects who actually did it and who are arrested. Until a suspect is named or arrest made I suspect everyone.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

I totally agree, Eloise, and you have every right to suspect whoever you want.