Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #37

[CuriousCritter]

As the Courts are in different States, I doubt an outcome of a costs hearing will make any difference to a Suppression order in a another State.

Maybe not, but if the outcome of NSW's findings was in MSM then that would interfere with proceedings in VIC hence a suppression needed. Maybe once the VIC matters have been fully dealt with on the 20th, the suppression maybe lifted IMO

 

[Blues Clues]

Is anyone able to open this report from 10th August '18?

It's likely to be the same as the DT report from 9th August '18, but 'may' have some added details. Interesting headline. imo

 

[Thebottomline]

Is anyone able to open this report from 10th August '18?

It's likely to be the same as the DT report from 9th August '18, but 'may' have some added details. Interesting headline. imo

View attachment 147466

Normally if you type the headline in google search it often takes you to press reader where you can read article . I tried with this one and page has been removed.

 

[Thebottomline]

Is anyone able to open this report from 10th August '18?

It's likely to be the same as the DT report from 9th August '18, but 'may' have some added details. Interesting headline. imo

View attachment 147466

withdrawn, dismissed dropped ? Which one is it ?

 

[Goosewhisperer]

withdrawn, dismissed dropped ? Which one is it ?

We won't know until/if the suppression order is lifted.

 

[SouthAussie]

Is anyone able to open this report from 10th August '18?

It's likely to be the same as the DT report from 9th August '18, but 'may' have some added details. Interesting headline. imo

View attachment 147466

I can open it ... it is the same article that has been referenced multiple times here before. And it is the only report that I have seen that actually quotes what the magistrate said about the charges.

I think soso can also open the Telegraph's articles.


"William Spedding had been facing two charges of sexually penetrating a child aged under 10 and five counts of indecent assault between 1983 and 1987 at Corio and Clarendon near Ballarat.

But prosecutors withdrew the 67-year-old’s charges in the Ballarat Magistrates’ Court yesterday.

“I will mark all charges as withdrawn,” Magistrate Ronald Saines said.

Spedding’s Victorian matter will return to Ballarat Magistrates’ Court for a costs application on September 20."
We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph
The Daily Telegraph - August 10, 2018

 

[SouthAussie]

withdrawn, dismissed dropped ? Which one is it ?

It is withdrawn. I have posted the exact words the magistrate said multiple times.

 

[Thebottomline]

It is withdrawn. I have posted the exact words the magistrate said multiple times.

Thankyou , it was just getting confusing !
Question answered

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Is anyone able to open this report from 10th August '18?

It's likely to be the same as the DT report from 9th August '18, but 'may' have some added details. Interesting headline. imo

View attachment 147466

"Corio" seems unknown to me ....

 

[Thebottomline]

"Corio" seems unknown to me ....

Not a place you’d want to know. I know kids who travel the train line from Melbourne to Geelong grammar avoid the station for safety reasons !

 

[SouthAussie]

"Corio" seems unknown to me ....

It is one of the places where the alleged child sex abuses happened. In Corio and Clarendon, Victoria. (see map below)

William Spedding had been facing two charges of sexually penetrating a child aged under 10 and five counts of indecent assault between 1983 and 1987 at Corio and Clarendon near Ballarat.
We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph
Daily Telegraph - August 10, 2018

 

[iailwa]

Law enforcement under no circumstances will declare a person of interest no longer a person of interest.

Law enforcement at no time have in fact declared anyone a person of interest.

Its all media beat up and media who have declared persons of interest.

When police charge a person or persons they declare that the person a suspect as they are suspected of committing the crime subject to the charge.

It is a Court process that can then declare charged persons not guilty of the charge. Or if police or DPP withdraw charges it is then declared charges withdrawn.

How do you know? Could we have a link please? thank you

 

[iailwa]

It is one of the places where the alleged child sex abuses happened. In Corio and Clarendon, Victoria. (see map below)

William Spedding had been facing two charges of sexually penetrating a child aged under 10 and five counts of indecent assault between 1983 and 1987 at Corio and Clarendon near Ballarat.
We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph
Daily Telegraph - August 10, 2018

This just makes me feel so sick. I just don't know how anyone can do this to a child. It makes me swing back to BS again - for WT... just so sad & mad, even if it's not him, it could be some other similar *advertiser censored**ole, & i just want she/him found & other stuff i just can't mention here... I really feel it today his families must feel this every day, & i just can't imagine it.. yes a little hormonal & emotional,; human ; feeling their loss more than usual for some reason ... i jus wish wish he was found tomorrow. Come home little William xx

 

[deugirtni]

withdrawn, dismissed dropped ? Which one is it ?

It *is* very confusing - as most other reporting involving the WT case, and/or BS has been, imo. In this article below, it is written both ways - in the headline as 'dismissed', and in the story both as 'dismissed' and 'withdrawn':

William Tyrell 'person of interest' has historic child sex charges dismissed


A MAN previously named by police as a person of interest in the disappearance of NSW toddler William Tyrrell has had historic child sex abuse charges against him dismissed in a Victorian court.
....
But prosecutors withdrew the 67-year-old’s charges in the Ballarat Magistrates’ Court today.

The white goods repairman has denied the allegations was not required to appear in court.

“I will mark all charges as withdrawn,” Magistrate Ronald Saines said.

William Tyrell 'person of interest' has historic child sex charges dismissed

 

[Thebottomline]

It *is* very confusing - as most other reporting involving the WT case, and/or BS has been, imo. In this article below, it is written both ways - in the headline as 'dismissed', and in the story both as 'dismissed' and 'withdrawn':

William Tyrell 'person of interest' has historic child sex charges dismissed


A MAN previously named by police as a person of interest in the disappearance of NSW toddler William Tyrrell has had historic child sex abuse charges against him dismissed in a Victorian court.
....
But prosecutors withdrew the 67-year-old’s charges in the Ballarat Magistrates’ Court today.

The white goods repairman has denied the allegations was not required to appear in court.

“I will mark all charges as withdrawn,” Magistrate Ronald Saines said.

William Tyrell 'person of interest' has historic child sex charges dismissed

Thankyou ,I thought I was the only one confused ! But as south Aussie pointed out, I will go with the magistrates wording of withdrawn.

 

[SouthAussie]

I don't believe there is a suppression in regards to the VIC charges, the outcome of that was published in MSM.

There appears to be suppression about the details of why the case was withdrawn.

ACA reports the withdrawal of the case as "spectacular" ... yet doesn't elaborate on why that withdrawal is spectacular.

Nor have any of the more credible sources explained about this spectacular withdrawal.

 

[SouthAussie]

I think it is a sad, sad situation that we have here in Australia.


.... for 88.5 out of 100 Australian victims who report a sexual assault to the police, their case is not proceeded with by the police or prosecution; or it is dismissed, withdrawn, or acquitted, once in court. Therefore, for almost nine out of 10 sexual assault victims, no formal legal redress occurs.

Australian Institute of Family Studies
The journey of 100 cases

 

[Karinna]

There appears to be suppression about the details of why the case was withdrawn.

ACA reports the withdrawal of the case as "spectacular" ... yet doesn't elaborate on why that withdrawal is spectacular.

Nor have any of the more credible sources explained about this spectacular withdrawal.

BBM, It's called Obfuscating.
The obscuring of the intended meaning of communication by making the message difficult to understand, usually with confusing and ambiguous language

 

[Thebottomline]

Williams foster family are being kept unidentifiable to the general public for reasons understood, whether it’s there’s or facs I’m not aware of , but KT has been identified and interviewed on national television. I can’t understand her silence now. I don’t want to speculate as I’m not in her awful horrid predicament but where is her face all over the media begging for info on her baby . She has been identified and the nation knows who she is, I can’t understand ? Lots of selfies but nothing about her baby. Is she under some suppression aswell ? Otherwise wouldn’t you be making your presence as his mum known and just going full strength ahead in the media , or Sm .Im not at all saying she had anything to do with Williams disappearence and I feel incredibly sad for her but wouldn’t it make it more personalised to have someone out there that the whole country knows about to push the agenda.

 

[Karinna]

Williams foster family are being kept unidentifiable to the general public for reasons understood, whether it’s there’s or facs I’m not aware of , but KT has been identified and interviewed on national television. I can’t understand her silence now. I don’t want to speculate as I’m not in her awful horrid predicament but where is her face all over the media begging for info on her baby . She has been identified and the nation knows who she is, I can’t understand ?

For all we know KT might be demanding those answers privately.
She was initially not allowed to plead publicly for her child to be safely returned to her because of the fact he was a fostered child.