Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #33

[frogwell]

Not her circus or her monkeys , I can’t see one positive that’s come from this. All she has achieved is to give an avenue for open fodder on the bio parents .

OK. That is not my understanding of the situation. My understanding is that KT applied herself to the Supreme Court for the suppression of her identity to be lifted. They were present in the court at the same time as APS had her matter dealt with. I took my understanding from the Caselaw notes and from actual explanations of the process by APS. My understanding is that she is being attributed with something she has not done. MOO

 

[Hbayne]

[/U]

Why would she be? She was in the Supreme Court on the same day as KT as she had charges to defend herself. She was not in there in any capacity to support KT, they all just happened to be in the same court on the same day, nutting out their own issues that have arisen due to WT's disappearance. There are many different rights involved to be considered. Children's rights, Foster's rights, Bio's rights, media rights, FaCs rights, Police investigation rights, the public's rights. I think APS may have sympathy for the bios and felt a cameraderie against FaCs but has made it clear, her primary interest is in what has happened to WT. IMO

What has she accomplished ? Has it in any way helped in William ?

 

[Eloise]

Do you really think that it’s a possibility that William’s remains are within that 5 sq km area? Or that missing him in a search would’ve been ‘just one of those things’? I’d be surprised if it would be a remote possibility, at best, with a probability of close to zero in William’s case. Besides, DCI Jubelin and all the of the profilers that have been consulted to date have stated publicly that William was abducted — including Steve(?) Jones who was interviewed on the recent Sunday Night program.

Dunno, maybe? I just don't think it's impossible. Like I said, I have no pet theories on William and haven't for ages and ages now, not since a million years ago when it seemed like a sure thing that BS did it and arrest was going to happen any moment. When that didn't happen, I figured the best thing was to just have a wide open mind on what happened, and that hasn't changed. Short of alien abduction there is literally no scenario I can think of that would either surprise me OR leave me thinking "oh I knew it was definitely that and nothing else all along".

I don't trust what cops say. I don't mean that in a "I don't trust cops" way exactly, I mean that in a "they'll say anything during an active investigation if they think it's going to end up in a certain result for them". I don't really take anything they say in media interviews of that nature as really being about informing the public about anything. Pure factual updates would be given in a press conference or media statement. They do those interviews to make certain people they have their eye on think or act a certain way or hopefully say something they wouldn't have otherwise. They say things to deflect and obfuscate. Things like "the family aren't under suspicion"; not just in this case but in other cases, is the classic example of something they'll say that us out here can't really argue with them about, but it turns out it wasn't ever true.

I'm not saying that because I think the family did it either. I really really don't know and don't have an opinion on WT's families other than to say he deserved better.

 

[Hbayne]

I didn’t know Karlie was at the NSW Supreme Court’s or the Court of Appeals’ hearings of the matters irt FaCS v. Allanna Pearl Smith. I was under the impression she had given her statements via a FaCS worker.

me neither

 

[they'll get you]

me neither

Me neither.

I’m here reading and learning God only knows what.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[sosocurious]

OK. That is not my understanding of the situation. My understanding is that KT applied herself to the Supreme Court for the suppression of her identity to be lifted. They were present in the court at the same time as APS had her matter dealt with. I took my understanding from the Caselaw notes and from actual explanations of the process by APS. My understanding is that she is being attributed with something she has not done. MOO

APS is being attributed with something she has not done?

Allana Smith single-handedly took on the Department of Family and Community Services to reveal the truth about William Tyrrell.
Now, she has spoken out about why she fought so hard for the little boy she never even met.

Statement from a Department of Family and Community Services spokesperson:

If William’s care status was relevant to his disappearance or the police investigation, FACS would have allowed it to be revealed.

https://www.9now.com.au/a-current-affair/2017/extras/latest/170829/fighting-for-william

 

[frogwell]

I think you misunderstood my intention. I wasn’t implying that Walking Warriors have broken the law by organising walks, froggy. What I was trying to ascertain initially was if Walking Warriors had the support of William’s family members. If they weren’t registered or disendorsed by the official ‘Where’s William?’ campaign there must’ve been some reason. I understand that both the NSW Supreme Court and Court of Appeals found for APS in the matter altjough that, too, still doesn’t answer if Walking Warriors had the support of any of William’s family members either.

I am sure if we’ve all stuck with William’s case for a number of years, we’re all on his side — or at least I would hope so.
__________

PS Thank you for your kind Easter wishes too, froggy x

Walking Warriors took the initiative to create W4W off their own bat to be held on the 1st anniversary of his disappearance.They were not endorsed by the Where's William Campaign. The Where's William campaign contacted Walking Warriors when they understood they were promoting a walk and told them that any groups needed to register to be endorsed by them, to fundraise and for insurance cover. Some groups did and many didn't cause they didn't feel the need to be endorsed by the Where's William Campaign or see why it matters particularly. I seem to remember one post on the Where's William FB page where the Walking Warriors amongst a couple of other groups were thanked, (I'd have to find it) for the W4W efforts, but it went sour not too long after that. MOO

 

[1968]

There’s one little girl whose rights of anonymity is paramount.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yes a huge reason IMO.

When I play devils advocate and consider reasons why the identification of the FF even matters in regards to the search for William -
and how it might help -
I can’t think of anything.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Bohemian]

Dunno, maybe? I just don't think it's impossible. Like I said, I have no pet theories on William and haven't for ages and ages now, not since a million years ago when it seemed like a sure thing that BS did it and arrest was going to happen any moment. When that didn't happen, I figured the best thing was to just have a wide open mind on what happened, and that hasn't changed. Short of alien abduction there is literally no scenario I can think of that would either surprise me OR leave me thinking "oh I knew it was definitely that and nothing else all along".

I don't trust what cops say. I don't mean that in a "I don't trust cops" way exactly, I mean that in a "they'll say anything during an active investigation if they think it's going to end up in a certain result for them". I don't really take anything they say in media interviews of that nature as really being about informing the public about anything. Pure factual updates would be given in a press conference or media statement. They do those interviews to make certain people they have their eye on think or act a certain way or hopefully say something they wouldn't have otherwise. They say things to deflect and obfuscate. Things like "the family aren't under suspicion"; not just in this case but in other cases, is the classic example of something they'll say that us out here can't really argue with them about, but it turns out it wasn't ever true.

I'm not saying that because I think the family did it either. I really really don't know and don't have an opinion on WT's families other than to say he deserved better.

I don’t think it’s impossible either, Eloise, just that the probability when you take into account an idea of likelihood ratios that the scenarios would be close to zero.

Police are people just like we are. Some are skilled investigators; some not as skilled, some feel their jobs are vocations; to others their job is just that, a job. I do trust them generally, as much as I trust nurses, doctors and teachers, etc; despite being let down by some and growing up in the same general area as Roger Rogerson. Basically, my recent experience of police officers is that if I don’t come to their notice for breaking the law, they don’t purposely go out of their way to insert themselves into my life, other than to give me a friendly smile and a ‘Hello.’ in response to mine. Their jobs are difficult enough without going to look for members of the general public to arrest (but I’m sure, just like us, they have their good and bad days). Sure they sometimes make unwise, even fatal, decisions but I think they are the exception rather than the rule.

I don’t idolise DCI Jubelin either, despite my jokes about him. I am well aware of at least one of his failings irt the Gordon Wood case. I actually heard the physicist(?) Dr Philip(?) Cross speak about the evidence he provided in the case and why it was correct. I was convinced until I read about the quashing of Mr Wood’s conviction and after reading the record of interview I think DCI Jubelin was too. I’d like to think he is a little more circumspect and skilled as a lead investigator in William’s case. Just as I’d hope none of us are the people we were 20 years ago, I’d hope we have all become wiser with age. Although maybe I’m simply naive.

Undoubtedly, there are aspects of William’s case we don’t know but I have always read or listened very carefully to official statements/pressers; especially those made by DCI Jubelin. In fact, out of the multitude of MSM articles/TV programs, those are the only words I take at anywhere near face value and I’m well aware words can be twisted. I really can’t see that there is any conspiracy connected with William’s disappearance from what I’ve heard so far and I trust that he has William’s and his families’ best interests at heart and there are excellent reasons for ‘holding back’ information from the public that could harm a successful prosecution of an offender.

I don’t think William’s families were responsible for his disappearance either. Hopefully, one day we will learn what happened to him that fateful day.

 

[frogwell]

Not her circus or her monkeys , I can’t see one positive that’s come from this. All she has achieved is to give an avenue for open fodder on the bio parents .

All she has done, is made it lawful for the media to report and the public to openly discuss in a factual way, that the person who had the ultimate responsibility for WT when he disappeared was the Minister and I wonder having known that for ages now, why the Minister has not been questioned by the media about his/her responsibility for a child who has gone missing. IMO

 

[Bohemian]

Walking Warriors took the initiative to create W4W off their own bat to be held on the 1st anniversary of his disappearance.They were not endorsed by the Where's William Campaign. The Where's William campaign contacted Walking Warriors when they understood they were promoting a walk and told them that any groups needed to register to be endorsed by them, to fundraise and for insurance cover. Some groups did and many didn't cause they didn't feel the need to be endorsed by the Where's William Campaign or see why it matters particularly. I seem to remember one post on the Where's William FB page where the Walking Warriors amongst a couple of other groups were thanked, (I'd have to find it) for the W4W efforts, but it went sour not too long after that. MOO

I understand Walking Warriors weren’t endorsed by the official ‘Where’s William?’ campaign. Is what you’re saying is that they weren’t endorsed by William’s family either? Well, if that’s the case, ‘Where’s the beef?’; as ‘they’ say. The official ‘Where’s William?’ campaign, asked them to register. Why not just register or not conduct the walks? And then to let it get so out of control we were told of accusations of billboards being surreptitiously removed, suggestions that donations were being used improperly and then to start collecting signatures to demand an inquest before the police investigation is concluded, let alone imply that there was some type of ‘cover up’ (I read the wording of the petition). It just seems to have been blown out if all proportion.

 

[Bohemian]

All she has done, is made it lawful for the media to report and the public to openly discuss in a factual way, that the person who had the ultimate responsibility for WT when he disappeared was the Minister and I wonder having known that for ages now, why the Minister has not been questioned by the media about his/her responsibility for a child who has gone missing. IMO

I suppose you’d have to ask the media that question as well as why they thought it proper to ‘out’ Karlie and her children immediately after APS won the appeal.

 

[frogwell]

I understand Walking Warriors weren’t endorsed by the official ‘Where’s William?’ campaign. Is what you’re saying is that they weren’t endorsed by William’s family either? Well, if that’s the case, ‘Where’s the beef?’; as ‘they’ say. The official ‘Where’s William?’ campaign, asked them to register. Why not just register or not conduct the walks? And then to let it get so out of control we were told of accusations of billboards being surreptitiously removed, suggestions that donations were being used improperly and then to start collecting signatures to demand an inquest before the police investigation is concluded, let alone imply that there was some type of ‘cover up’ (I read the wording of the petition). It just seems to have been blown out if all proportion.

I just don't get what you are saying but I agree it did spiral. To my knowledge an endorsment from the Where's William Campaign is an endorsment from the WT's ff. I haven't seen them doing any separate endorsment of anything. I guess the beef as you put it was initially contact from Clare Collins telling this group what to do that she had no affiliation with and urging them to fundraise when that was not the agenda of the group. Why should they register or not conduct the walks? They did not have the same agenda as her. In the context of when this went down, I think a few things need to be considered. Where many would usually want the family's endorsment on such a project, there were question marks around the family for the public and seeking their approval was less important than doing something for WT. Someone on the W4W sight asked questions about 2 billboards and then it turned into some type of placard. The Official Campaign reacted badly and went to MSM, And Now to Love, seems to be the go to for this campaign. So they threw mud back. Both Campaigns could have done a lot better. I agree W4W does seem hijacked. Like all over the net though, this investigation leaves some big questions hanging, if they leave it too long, people are going to make up their own story about what has happened to WT, they can't help themselves. IMO

 

[frogwell]

APS is being attributed with something she has not done?

Allana Smith single-handedly took on the Department of Family and Community Services to reveal the truth about William Tyrrell.
Now, she has spoken out about why she fought so hard for the little boy she never even met.

Statement from a Department of Family and Community Services spokesperson:

If William’s care status was relevant to his disappearance or the police investigation, FACS would have allowed it to be revealed.

https://www.9now.com.au/a-current-affair/2017/extras/latest/170829/fighting-for-william

The hyperbole around the story and the words written about this ACA segment are very distracting, but if you listen to what APS says about why she was taken to court, what her interest is in this case and what she wanted to achieve, I think it's pretty straight forward. IMO

 

[frogwell]

My apologies, I seemed to have got quite confused about what my understanding of what has occurred in the Supreme Court case FaCs v APS. I don't know if there was a charge or an injunction and how they are handled in a court. However because of certain orders she refused to follow, she had a date in the Supreme Court. Various other parties made submissions during her case as to why it is important or not that she follow that order. FaCs made arguments for the welfare of both children, which the judge said there were worse things to contemplate in one child's case and the other child can be protected in another way, which she had not been up until that point. The detective Garry Jubelin submitted that the investigation would be hindered if WT's status was revealed, to which the judge did not find it substantiated adequately, the foster father submitted reasons he and his wife's identity should remain protected which the judge deduced that up until that point, he really didn't have claims to any protection within that process up until that point, and that he was of the opinion what had been protecting his identity so far was a misinterpretation of a section of the law, however once the foster daughter was under a newer protection then this extended to him and his wife. In regards to submissions by APS, the information looking to be legally disclosed was justifiably in the interest of the public, In the bio mother's submission she was aware that having her identity revealed was going to be hard but she thought it was the right thing to do. So this all came under the banner of one defendant, and different people's understanding of how they would be affected if it was known that WT was in the care of the minister publicly. I made a mistake in what I wrote earlier about KT seeking suppresion being lifted herself. But she was 27-28 when she made this submission and she could have objected to it, but she didn't. I feel very sorry that naming the Minister as being responsible for WT, opens up his Bios to no protection, however, I will don't hang that on APS, I blame the structure of the law and the Bios for making that choice. For all the issues the title of the case should have been FaCs v The public. MOO

 

[Bohemian]

Thanks for the history lesson, froggy. I think the situation between APS, Walking Warriors and the official ‘Where’s William?’ campaign are as close as are as about as clear as they are going to get, without a roundtable discussion between all parties. Let’s leave it to them to sort somewhere other than here on WS and get back to William’s misper case.

 

[Bohemian]

Thanks for the history lesson, froggy. I think the situation between APS, Walking Warriors and the official ‘Where’s William?’ campaign [...] is as about as clear as it is going to get, without a roundtable discussion between all parties. Let’s leave it to them to sort out somewhere other than here on WS and get back to William’s misper case.

Edited above reply. (It was late when I typed the original.)

 

[Bohemian]

Well they were the last people to see WT before he disappeared and if their identities were revealed their statements about events might be contradicted by others. IMO

Do you really think that the police, including SF investigators, haven’t gone over and verified William’s families’ alibis for the period before and after he disappeared? They would have first-person statements from all relevant witnesses, including CCTV from McDonalds and along the Pacific Highway and maybe even, as alleged in the Ristevski case IIRC, other data from electronic devices.

If investigators don’t know the minute movements of all the members of William’s immediate families (ie; FF, FO, FGM, BM, BF and BGP’s) at this point in time then that falls under the category of ineptitude/conspiracy irt William’s disappearance/abduction/potential murder. As I said before the probability of that scenario is close to zero. I would take take the ‘little boy list/undiscovered remains’ scenario over that any day of the week.

I am sure that, if it was necessary to further the investigation, William’s FF would have been publicly identified, not to mention William’s sister being removed from their care pronto. As it stands, neither of these events have occurred (to my knowledge anyway).

 

[frogwell]

Do you really think that the police, including SF investigators, haven’t gone over and verified William’s families’ alibis for the period before and after he disappeared? They would have first-person statements from all relevant witnesses, including CCTV from McDonalds and along the Pacific Highway and maybe even, as alleged in the Ristevski case IIRC, other data from electronic devices.

If investigators don’t know the minute movements of all the members of William’s immediate families (ie; FF, FO, FGM, BM, BF and BGP’s) at this point in time then that falls under the category of ineptitude/conspiracy irt William’s disappearance/abduction/potential murder. As I said before the probability of that scenario is close to zero. I would take take the ‘little boy list/undiscovered remains’ scenario over that any day of the week.

I am sure that, if it was necessary to further the investigation, William’s FF would have been publicly identified, not to mention William’s sister being removed from their care pronto. As it stands, neither of these events have occurred (to my knowledge anyway).

I understand your points. I don't assume what SFR has or hasn't investigated or draw conclusions about that. From another well known case, I have come to understand, that the parameters for an investigation occassionally handed to police are restrictive, and knowing that, I take that into consideration. We just don't know what we don't know. The person I was responding to couldn't find one good or helpful reason for identifying the FP, so I offered the obvious one. IMO

 

[purpleandgreen]

She also made it open slather on Karlie and Brendan. IMO

All she has done, is made it lawful for the media to report and the public to openly discuss in a factual way, that the person who had the ultimate responsibility for WT when he disappeared was the Minister and I wonder having known that for ages now, why the Minister has not been questioned by the media about his/her responsibility for a child who has gone missing. IMO