Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #36

[Bohemian]

that's Ok to disagree BO, but given no-one knows what happened to little WT yet, or evidence is lacking wrt to what, then it's possible there is a killer out there. And for that reason, then it's in the best interest of the community to hold an inquest IMO

Yes, it is OK for us to disagree. I respect your opinion, even though I don’t share it.

 

[sosocurious]

I am guessing that none of those public persons with skin in the game have officially requested an inquest.

When I looked at the petition for an inquest on change.org, none of those dangers to the community or their children were specifically mentioned as reasons for the petition.

The only reasons that were mentioned seemed to be ones that were potentially meddling with the investigation. imo

• his birth family gagged
• others remaining anonymous
• misinformation being published intentionally
• changes in the lead investigator
• suppression orders withholding relevant details that could hold the key

This is the first time I have looked at that petition, and I was a little surprised at the reasons for it, as I would think those reasons would have no impact at all on a Coroner's decision.

As we are aware, the Coroner has been following the investigation closely. The Coroner would already know the reasons for anything substantive within the petition's reasons.

Yes it is one thing to take a petition. But to ask the lead investigator be changed it seems to be rather personal.
jmo

Curious has there been another instance of the public demanding an inquest and change of lead investigator, that presumably did not involve family?

 

[iailwa]

I agree with Mr Leveson view. We the public have very little understand of the complicated history and the family dynamics. Nor, do we know what the team investigating William's disappearance know or what evidence they may have.
We can have opinions but we really know squat....in the scheme of things.

While an inquest was always going to be the result if William was not found. Given he is a missing child who was under the care of the minister.

I do feel that the timing of the inquest is not up to us the public to determine or try and force.

The family/families can push for the inquest at any time. Just as the Morcombe's did.

The Leveson's on the other hand had to make a deal with the devil so as their son could be returned home to them.
After having sat through a court case. Only to see the person that had dumped their son like a piece of rubbish be acquitted.

jmo

so are you hinting that Leverson's inquest was too premature or disorganised? I agree that an inquest needs to be timely. Perhaps this inquest was not well done? BPC's was... some are, some aren't? I feel the Leverson's have emotive reasons about the do'd & don'ts of inquests unfortunately for them. JMO

 

[Bohemian]

so are you hinting that Leverson's inquest was too premature or disorganised? I agree that an inquest needs to be timely. Perhaps this inquest was not well done? BPC's was... some are, some aren't? I feel the Leverson's have emotive reasons about the do'd & don'ts of inquests unfortunately for them. JMO

Of course they had emotive reasons, iailwa, their son was missing, presumed dead!

 

[CuriousCritter]

I hear stories from overseas of situations where children have disappeared for decades and the turned up in circumstances. I also hear stories of incidents have occurred that are by accident and been covered up and then revealed. So, we are keeping an open mind to it and our focus is not just on sex offenders or, let's break it down; paedophiles. We're not just looking at that aspect of it.

I also hear stories of incidents have occurred that are by accident and been covered up and then revealed.

Why did Jubes even say that, when he has stated many times FP are cleared???

 

[iailwa]

Of course they had emotive reasons, iailwa, their son was missing, presumed dead!

same with DM, but a different approach hey? I'm just saying, i think it's in the public interests that inquests proceed...

 

[iailwa]

deleted

 

[iailwa]

I also hear stories of incidents have occurred that are by accident and been covered up and then revealed.

Why did Jubes even say that, when he has stated many times FP are cleared???

Exactly. Sometimes it takes an inquest to find these things out. No matter the crime, an inquest should proceed if there are no arrests... for everyones benefit

 

[sosocurious]

so are you hinting that Leverson's inquest was too premature or disorganised? I agree that an inquest needs to be timely. Perhaps this inquest was not well done? BPC's was... some are, some aren't? I feel the Leverson's have emotive reasons about the do'd & don'ts of inquests unfortunately for them. JMO

No! Maybe he was charged to early...imo
I am all for the data being available so as things can be checked, double checked and cross referenced as many times as is required by the investigating team. So as nothing gets overlooked, lost or dismissed. I hope that the briefs in regard to William are heated, dogged and every possible scenario and every poi/suspect is explored, examined, inspected, reinspected, closely and thoroughly.
The media tells us there are 5 persons of interest....down from 600 ish.

I think a lot of lessons will have been learned from Danny and Matty cases.
An inquest will be held when the coroner feels it appropriate to proceed.

imo

 

[sosocurious]

I also hear stories of incidents have occurred that are by accident and been covered up and then revealed.

Why did Jubes even say that, when he has stated many times FP are cleared???

Because if he didn't. We would have asked why he didn't. He mentioned all the possible scenario's.
imo

 

[JLZ]

I also hear stories of incidents have occurred that are by accident and been covered up and then revealed.

Why did Jubes even say that, when he has stated many times FP are cleared???

I think that is to lower the stakes in the mind of someone who might come forward but is scared of extreme consequences either for self or somebody else. Sort of like the 'good cop' line of asking sympathetically, "Is there something you want to tell me?"

 

[purpleandgreen]

It doesn't say he knew where they were though. He just knew of a development. We cannot say for sure.

If anything a guilty man would of stayed away and kept a low profile.

It's all extremely tenuous.

I bet if you asked a Detective (not necessarily those involved in this s***-storm) they'd of hated the media hyping this up on their front pages.

All entirely counter productive to actually finding WT.

Why would you call this a s***-storm. Sounds as if it's downplaying it. A little boy was abducted. It's a very, very serious case and of the utmost priority, IMO. Certainly nothing to be dismissed.

 

[purpleandgreen]

Your opinion may well be correct.
My opinion is that he knew the search team and media were set up and was underway.

Surely he would. He was a local, and didn't someone post not far back that it was the quickest route to his house, in defence of him being there at the search site? And I'll bet some phone calls and sms were darting around all over the place between a few of the players. IMO only, of course.

 

[Bohemian]

I also hear stories of incidents have occurred that are by accident and been covered up and then revealed.

Why did Jubes even say that, when he has stated many times FP are cleared???

Might have been talking about an MVA. Someone hitting William with their car, placing him inside and driving away, IDK. He said earlier that interview that the BP and the FP were cleared so that remark wasn’t in reference to any of them.

 

[iailwa]

No! Maybe he was charged to early...imo
I am all for the data being available so as things can be checked, double checked and cross referenced as many times as is required by the investigating team. So as nothing gets overlooked, lost or dismissed. I hope that the briefs in regard to William are heated, dogged and every possible scenario and every poi/suspect is explored, examined, inspected, reinspected, closely and thoroughly.
The media tells us there are 5 persons of interest....down from 600 ish.

I think a lot of lessons will have been learned from Danny and Matty cases.
An inquest will be held when the coroner feels it appropriate to proceed.

imo

true. BBM above in your reply - if he was charged too early, then that *advertiser censored*ks things up, for further down the road. I agree with the rest of what you say. Hopefully things are tripple checked etc. A lot of lessons will have been learned, and i'm sure SFR are quite aware. Let's hope this inquest (if it gets to that) is not hindered similarly. Yes, an inquest will proceed if the coroner wants so. Who is the coroner acting on behalf of do you think?

 

[iailwa]

Because if he didn't. We would have asked why he didn't. He mentioned all the possible scenario's.
imo

There's so many scenarios, some we can't even imagine. But yes

 

[Bohemian]

same with DM, but a different approach hey? I'm just saying, i think it's in the public interests that inquests proceed...

Yes and Daniel’s loved ones had interests irt the inquest of their son too. I would dream of infringing on those rights. It’s not my, or anyone else’s, place to do that; just as it isn’t in William’s case.

 

[purpleandgreen]

Yes it is one thing to take a petition. But to ask the lead investigator be changed it seems to be rather personal.
jmo

Curious has there been another instance of the public demanding an inquest and change of lead investigator, that presumably did not involve family?

Maybe someone wants the change because the lead investigator is getting a little too close to the truth. Just a thought and certainly JMO.

 

[Bohemian]

Exactly. Sometimes it takes an inquest to find these things out. No matter the crime, an inquest should proceed if there are no arrests... for everyones benefit

An inquest should proceed, first and foremost, in the missing person’s or deceased’s interest; as well as those of their loved ones.

 

[purpleandgreen]

Might have been talking about an MVA. Someone hitting William with their car, placing him inside and driving away, IDK. He said earlier that interview that the BP and the FP were cleared so that remark wasn’t in reference to any of them.

Maybe he might have meant something happened after he was abducted? Maybe he's trying to target the 'someone who knows something' with a lure?

Maybe he's just generalising about a lot of different cases.

BTW, was there a link to where he said that? TIA. It's much easier to analyse if we have it in context.