Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #32

[Violet77]

I think the most obvious POI/scenario is what took place in removing little William from his life.

Spedding may have had plans to attend the award ceremony with Margret, but either dropped her there, or arranged to meet her there - the small window of opportunity I think allows Margaret to believe in her husbands innocents or enables her to turn a blind eye with less guilt.
Spedding arrives on Benaroon drive, & comes across little William & as we all have imagined, the scenario of "hey Spidey" takes place, William is whisked away in the heat of the moment, when Spedding realises that an opportunity to act on the side of him he has been suppressing in his day to day life (with individuals he could be directly linked to) has just come bouncing down the hill dressed as Spiderman.

What takes place next is anyones guess, I don't think, given the timeframe involved (Spedding needs to be able to convince Margret of his innocence by not extending his absence) that Spedding's urges to assault William ever had the chance to be inflicted on the young boy, William, being a boy "who knew his limits" realises he is no longer in the safe reach of his parents & panics, which triggers an asthma attack, Spedding also panics & instead of getting help, does nothing & the attack ends William's life.
Spedding either leaves little William in his van, (maybe in some sort of white goods packaging) or he brazenly removes the child's body & hides it in the pawn shop office. He goes about his activities with Margret, creating a partial alibi & sealing the deal for Margret to cover the holes in the rest of his alibi.
William is disposed of later, whether in Dunbogan, or on rout to or from, I'm not sure.

I think the fact that he did not technically assault William (as per my opinion), his guilt his less (not that pedophiles are usually the guilt ridden, ready to put their hands up type). He is able to calmly recite a script during a YouTube video stating over & over that he did not hurt William Tyrrell.

 

[SouthAussie]

As much as I hate to say and think this, I somehow think there are things about Spedding's timeline/probable actions that morning that we do not yet know.

Things that led a close family member of William's to become an ambassador for Bravehearts in NSW. Things that make this person feel somewhat better working with an organisation like this. Perhaps helps them to feel that they are doing something to help children who have been put in a similar position to the position William may have been confronted with that morning. Doing something in William's name .... William's legacy.

Similar to things that the Morcombes did for Daniel, only in a more necessarily 'anonymous' capacity.


Congratulations to all at Bravehearts for your ongoing work educating, empowering and protecting Australia's children and adult survivors of child sexual assault through a very effective and impressive range of programs.
– Former Australian Prime Minister, Julia Gillard
https://bravehearts.org.au/

 

[Jennifer17]

I think the most obvious POI/scenario is what took place in removing little William from his life.

Spedding may have had plans to attend the award ceremony with Margret, but either dropped her there, or arranged to meet her there - the small window of opportunity I think allows Margaret to believe in her husbands innocents or enables her to turn a blind eye with less guilt.
Spedding arrives on Benaroon drive, & comes across little William & as we all have imagined, the scenario of "hey Spidey" takes place, William is whisked away in the heat of the moment, when Spedding realises that an opportunity to act on the side of him he has been suppressing in his day to day life (with individuals he could be directly linked to) has just come bouncing down the hill dressed as Spiderman.

What takes place next is anyones guess, I don't think, given the timeframe involved (Spedding needs to be able to convince Margret of his innocence by not extending his absence) that Spedding's urges to assault William ever had the chance to be inflicted on the young boy, William, being a boy "who knew his limits" realises he is no longer in the safe reach of his parents & panics, which triggers an asthma attack, Spedding also panics & instead of getting help, does nothing & the attack ends William's life.
Spedding either leaves little William in his van, (maybe in some sort of white goods packaging) or he brazenly removes the child's body & hides it in the pawn shop office. He goes about his activities with Margret, creating a partial alibi & sealing the deal for Margret to cover the holes in the rest of his alibi.
William is disposed of later, whether in Dunbogan, or on rout to or from, I'm not sure.

I think the fact that he did not technically assault William (as per my opinion), his guilt his less (not that pedophiles are usually the guilt ridden, ready to put their hands up type). He is able to calmly recite a script during a YouTube video stating over & over that he did not hurt William Tyrrell.

It does not take long for anyone to be sexually assaulted, in the heat of the moment, especially a small child.

 

[Violet77]

It does not take long for anyone to be sexually assaulted, in the heat of the moment, especially a small child.

Agreed... although I don’t doubt his ability to tell a convincing lie, it just seems as though he is really convincing when he states he did not hurt William, as though it was really the truth - then again, maybe it’s just wishful thinking that little William was at least spared that horrific experience before his life was taken from him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SouthAussie]

I have always wondered if he ever allowed a lie detector test. Not admissible in court as evidence, but something police can employ to assist their thoughts in an investigation.

 

[SouthAussie]

Agreed... although I don’t doubt his ability to tell a convincing lie, it just seems as though he is really convincing when he states he did not hurt William, as though it was really the truth - then again, maybe it’s just wishful thinking that little William was at least spared that horrific experience before his life was taken from him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Judging by his foster mum's upset reactions in her police/60 Minutes interviews, I think she would rather think this way as well. Anything else is so horrific.

Remembering, too, that Jubelin tried to give someone in an 'accidental death' type of situation an out. I recall, in one of his pressers, Jubelin saying that this could have been an accident, when he was appealing with anyone with any knowledge to please come forward.


.

 

[Jennifer17]

I have always wondered if he ever allowed a lie detector test. Not admissible in court as evidence, but something police can employ to assist their thoughts in an investigation.

Do we even do polygraphs?

 

[SouthAussie]

Do we even do polygraphs?

Most definitely. We even have laws about their use by the police.

To further illustrate the point, we can look to s 6(1) of the Lie Detectors Act of New South Wales which states, that any evidence adduced from a polygraph machine will be considered as inadmissible by the courts.
It should be highlighted, that although evidence obtained from a polygraph machine is for the most part inadmissible, this does not however prevent the police from potentially using polygraph tests in the course of their investigations.
http://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/4452/can-evidence-gained-from-a-lie-detector-test-be-ad.aspx

Polygraph examiner Gavin Wilson, a former South Australian police officer who trained in the USA, said Australian police also find the tests useful, despite being unable to use them in court.
“It’s another tool in the police’s armoury,” Mr Wilson told True Crime Scene.
https://myaccount.news.com.au/sites...9cda5bee4d3fc8b8f6bd790b554&memtype=anonymous

In 1996 Steve was the first Victorian Police Officer to graduate from Western Oregon University USA as a certified polygraph examiner.
He has consulted his services to the Victoria Police Homicide Squad, South Australia Police Major Crime Squad and the media.
https://www.websleuths.com/forums/s...ll-NSW-12-Sept-2014-7&p=11574007#post11574007

 

[Jennifer17]

Judging by his foster mum's upset reactions in her police/60 Minutes interviews, I think she would rather think this way as well. Anything else is so horrific.

dia

But it is horrific that that little boy disappeared when he went around the corner of her mother's house.

 

[Jennifer17]

Most definitely. We even have laws about their use by the police.


To further illustrate the point, we can look to s 6(1) of the Lie Detectors Act of New South Wales which states, that any evidence adduced from a polygraph machine will be considered as inadmissible by the courts.
It should be highlighted, that although evidence obtained from a polygraph machine is for the most part inadmissible, this does not however prevent the police from potentially using polygraph tests in the course of their investigations.
http://www.findlaw.com.au/articles/4452/can-evidence-gained-from-a-lie-detector-test-be-ad.aspx

Polygraph examiner Gavin Wilson, a former South Australian police officer who trained in the USA, said Australian police also find the tests useful .....
https://myaccount.news.com.au/sites...9cda5bee4d3fc8b8f6bd790b554&memtype=anonymous

Useful for what?

 

[SouthAussie]

Useful for what?

You would need to read up on it. I am not a polygraph expert or a police officer. I just know they use them to assist in their investigations. Presumably to get a feeling for a person's resistance to them, and to get indications of truths/lies if a person is open to that.

 

[Violet77]

Judging by his foster mum's upset reactions in her police/60 Minutes interviews, I think she would rather think this way as well. Anything else is so horrific.

Remembering, too, that Jubelin tried to give someone in an 'accidental death' type of situation an out. I recall, in one of his pressers, Jubelin saying that this could have been an accident, when he was appealing with anyone with any knowledge to please come forward.


.

IMO Spedding wouldn’t have intended on killing William, perhaps dropping him off nearby after the assault, but his plans were changed by the accidental death.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SouthAussie]

IMO Spedding wouldn’t have intended on killing William, perhaps dropping him off nearby after the assault, but his plans were changed by the accidental death.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is certainly one consideration.

I think it is likely he had no way of returning William to any close-ish proximity, due to the full scale search that quickly ensued. With hundreds of people on the lookout, and out and about. He also may have felt he had 'no option', perhaps due to DNA he knew would be present, and injuries that may have been apparent, things like that.

He may not be a killer, per se, but he may have felt it was the only way to keep from being arrested and charged.

It is also possible William died from injuries sustained in an 'attack'. This happens to small children sometimes.

 

[louisepiglet]

I do not think BS is guilty of William's abduction. My reasons are as follows:
If he is a predator then there has been no reported incidents since the one he has (supposedly) been found innocent of.
He was expected at FGM so would be someone who police would check on so he could not be sure of complete anonymity.
If he was seen he could probably be identified because he is a local.
Police have apparently not found any substantial evidence because he has not been charged.
If the cars that FM "saw" were related to William's abduction then it means it was premeditated. People are saying that BS abducted William on the spur of the moment. It can't be both. I say "saw" because I really think police are using the cars sighting as part of a strategy.

 

[Violet77]

That is certainly one consideration.

I think it is likely he had no way of returning William to any close-ish proximity, due to the full scale search that quickly ensued. With hundreds of people on the lookout, and out and about. He also may have felt he had 'no option', perhaps due to DNA he knew would be present, and injuries that may have been apparent, things like that.

He may not be a killer, per se, but he may have felt it was the only way to keep from being arrested and charged.

It is also possible William died from injuries sustained in an 'attack'. This happens to small children sometimes.

True.
Poor little William didn’t stand a chance once he was out of his Mother’s reach.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SouthAussie]

"What if William’s case was not a planned abduction? “You’ve got to have two worlds collide — the situation where a three-year-old is momentarily unsupervised, and comes in contact with someone who is motivated to abduct that child … it doesn’t necessarily have to be this monster dressed in black who runs up, grabs the child and speeds off.” What if the person who abducted William had a reason to be in the street that day and had no malicious intent when he turned up Benaroon Drive?"

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/ne...sh-into-thin-air/story-e6frg6z6-1227308929078


This, to me, is the KISS principle in William's disappearance.

 

[louisepiglet]

"What if William’s case was not a planned abduction? “You’ve got to have two worlds collide — the situation where a three-year-old is momentarily unsupervised, and comes in contact with someone who is motivated to abduct that child … it doesn’t necessarily have to be this monster dressed in black who runs up, grabs the child and speeds off.” What if the person who abducted William had a reason to be in the street that day and had no malicious intent when he turned up Benaroon Drive?"

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/ne...sh-into-thin-air/story-e6frg6z6-1227308929078


This, to me, is the KISS principle in William's disappearance.

If this is the case then what do the cars have to do with it, It cannot be both. The presence of the cars make it a planned abduction. It was either spur of the moment or planned. I think the police are leaning towards planned because of the strategic release of the cars sighting.

 

[Violet77]

I do not think BS is guilty of William's abduction. My reasons are as follows:
If he is a predator then there has been no reported incidents since the one he has (supposedly) been found innocent of.
He was expected at FGM so would be someone who police would check on so he could not be sure of complete anonymity.
If he was seen he could probably be identified because he is a local.
Police have apparently not found any substantial evidence because he has not been charged.
If the cars that FM "saw" were related to William's abduction then it means it was premeditated. People are saying that BS abducted William on the spur of the moment. It can't be both. I say "saw" because I really think police are using the cars sighting as part of a strategy.

I think the most simple explanation is the right one here. All other poi’s named requires a much more intricate operation to have taken place IMO, cars siting in waiting, William being whisked away to another location, to be then handed on to someone else - planes, boats, cars have all been suggested to have taken part in his relocating - After all this time, someone would have cracked, surely! A suspicious wife, partner, friend, relative?? Or even one of the participants in the crime, with all the heat surrounding William’s case, surely the cracks would start to show by now.
In no way do I doubt the sick things that go on in a pedophiles head, or the fact that they clearly are not thinking too hard about the repercussions of their actions, but really, who in their right mind would accept “delivery” or take part in hiding or doing god knows what with the most recognizable child in Australia! Surely any pedophile ring wants to stay as under the radar as possible, IMO William was never met with that scenario.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[papertrail]

I do not think BS is guilty of William's abduction. My reasons are as follows:
If he is a predator then there has been no reported incidents since the one he has (supposedly) been found innocent of.
He was expected at FGM so would be someone who police would check on so he could not be sure of complete anonymity.
If he was seen he could probably be identified because he is a local.
Police have apparently not found any substantial evidence because he has not been charged.
If the cars that FM "saw" were related to William's abduction then it means it was premeditated. People are saying that BS abducted William on the spur of the moment. It can't be both. I say "saw" because I really think police are using the cars sighting as part of a strategy.

Mr Spedding has alleged history with young girls no alleged history with young boys.

 

[Jennifer17]

i agree. I am of the opinion that this mystery is much, much closer to home.