Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #39

[purpleandgreen]

I have never said I don't sympathise with the 2 victims of an atrocious historical crime. With the information that we do have, it has never been a case of either/or to me. I cannot reconcile a person smiling and looking all around themselves when faced with a media pack as having no thought for those victims or having some type of mental problem. I would say what is happening in front of her is probably uppermost in her mind and I find it kind of refreshing as opposed to some put on grim or sober face because that is what you are supposed to do in these circumstances. IMO

With all due respect I don’t recall saying that you did. In fact I try to be very mindful of WS TOS and not personalise comments and replies.

But if I were in that position, I certainly wouldn’t be smiling; I’d be horrified that me and mine were even accused of such a thing. Smiling, or smirking as some see it, would be the last thing I would do, I’m sure.

 

[SouthAussie]

Roll on March 25th. The sooner this inquest starts, the better.
May this improve the outcome for William's case.

And for the two women who were abused as small children, let's hope they perhaps find their way to a civil claim against the perpetrator of their violent abuse. A civil claim where the guilt is measured on the balance of probability, not on "without reasonable doubt" as it is in a criminal case.

Who knows, if Spedding is awarded any money in his defamation claim, maybe the two women can then take it right away from him in a civil claim.

The NSW Government has also removed the limitation period for survivors to launch civil claims for compensation, and improved the Model Litigant Policy which ensures a more compassionate approach to civil child abuse claims.
https://www.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/Media Releases/2018/new-legislation-to-strengthen-child-abuse-laws-details.pdf

 

[bearbear]

some people laugh when theyre nervous, or maybe thats her putting on a brave face?
or she could be enjoying the attention, or the feeling of "us against them"

 

[purpleandgreen]

Roll on March 25th. The sooner this inquest starts, the better.
May this improve the outcome for William's case.

And for the two women who were abused as small children, let's hope they perhaps find their way to a civil claim against the perpetrator of their violent abuse. A civil claim where the guilt is measured on the balance of probability, not on "without reasonable doubt" as it is in a criminal case.

Who knows, if Spedding is awarded any money in his defamation claim, maybe the two women can then take it right away from him in a civil claim.

The NSW Government has also removed the limitation period for survivors to launch civil claims for compensation, and improved the Model Litigant Policy which ensures a more compassionate approach to civil child abuse claims.
https://www.justice.nsw.gov.au/Documents/Media Releases/2018/new-legislation-to-strengthen-child-abuse-laws-details.pdf

And that would be justice at work at its best. IMO

 

[purpleandgreen]

some people laugh when theyre nervous, or maybe thats her putting on a brave face?
or she could be enjoying the attention, or the feeling of "us against them"

Yes I’m sure she has multiple motives too, bb. IMO

 

[Warshawski]

After seeing the ACA video with MS walking alongside BS watching his face for reactions I believe if she was unsure then she would be 100% sure now because he’s had all these years to convince her.
I might be wrong, I don’t know the woman but now she would be totally convinced her man is innocent & he’s the victim in all this unfairness.

Not really understanding what you're proposing here TGY... sorry.
I've also watched that video & my take on that factor was a women who was doing her best to be a supportive wife, but would've been happier elsewhere ..IMO.
I'm doing my best to be impartial in judgment, since neither We, nor it seems does Jube's Team, have solid evidence of that all important definitive & conclusive nailing 'piece'.

 

[frogwell]

Cases have been tried on circumstantial evidence before. BS has been occupied for a number of years with being dragged through the media, some time in detention, having his home and business searched, sitting through two historical trials, reporting requirements, providing DNA samples and a descriptive enough leak to inform the public that he is the prime suspect at this fresh inquest. The evidence, (not the speculation, innuendo, gossip or coincidences) that the Strikeforce have on him, obviously does not meet the DPP's threshold, after 4 years. So, how did he do it, what did he do and what has he done with WT? Did he turn up to do a job and innocense met evil or did he plan it after giving a quote on the Tuesday, did he come back and scope the house? I also think that even with the threshold in a civil case for the historical charges being on the balance of probability, the victims have a strong chance of not being awarded damages.IMO

 

[Warshawski]

Well, when you are defending the rest of your life against incarceration and it seems you have been acquitted, I guess you can afford a small smile... Especially if you haven't done anything wrong. I didn't see any smirk, i guess we see what we want to see. Upon examination of the video again, I see a woman trying to ignore a media pack in front of her and being self conscious, surely these ideas must have occurred to others on this forum. IMO

To be fair, IMO this forum is about finding / solving the disappearance of the little boy Willism, and then ensuring due justice is served.

It's my opinion that since we don't (sadly) have any concrete evidence that allows us to identify anyone involved on any level, then we need to remain charitable & empathic...

Bring on the evidence, and I'll bring on my own personal opinions of worthy punishment etc. !

 

[frogwell]

With all due respect I don’t recall saying that you did. In fact I try to be very mindful of WS TOS and not personalise comments and replies.

But if I were in that position, I certainly wouldn’t be smiling; I’d be horrified that me and mine were even accused of such a thing. Smiling, or smirking as some see it, would be the last thing I would do, I’m sure.

I should have added the quote I was responding to which was Southaussie's # 16, quote, where her post was personalised towards me and found my position puzzling as she thought I was pro human rights. I'll clarify by saying I am pro human rights, I am deeply concerned in this case about civil rights and liberties, in regards to how the investigation is conducted, the way the police are harnessing the media, the long time dragging someone over the coals, casting doubt and suspicion upon them publicly but not charging them. If one has faith in the media and the police then I can see why one would think BS is guilty. If you are skeptical of these institutions, as I am, and analyse their methods, as I do, I am still willing to give this POI the benefit of the doubt. Based on the facts that he has a clean record, no one has placed him there at the time of the disappearance, he has been searched and provide DNA and statements and maintains his innocence, he has gone to trial twice for historical charges and is still walking around free and from what we do know of the NSW charges, there may have been another perp, and he has not been charged in relation to WT. IMO

 

[SouthAussie]

I should have added the quote I was responding to which was Southaussie's # 16, quote, where her post was personalised towards me and found my position puzzling as she thought I was pro human rights. I'll clarify by saying I am pro human rights, I am deeply concerned in this case about civil rights and liberties, in regards to how the investigation is conducted, the way the police are harnessing the media ....

<rsbm>

Can't disagree with this part of your post, that's for sure. The police do harness the media, and utilise the media to their greatest advantage when trying their hardest to locate or pin down a perp ... and when trying to locate missing persons, like William.

It seems that when police do not need media assistance, they quickly do their job, and then the perp falls under sub judice and is not spoken of until their trial.

The free speech of the media does annoy civil libertarians. Notably seen in the Warriena Wright case when Terry O'Gorman was very vocal about the civil rights of Gable Tostee (now Eric Thomas), and when Terry O'Gorman publicly described the commission into child sex abuse by Cardinal Pell as a potential witch hunt, and when Terry O'Gorman stated that convicted pedo Douglas Jackway should have his name suppressed so he wasn't bashed in jail ....

 

[purpleandgreen]

Cases have been tried on circumstantial evidence before. BS has been occupied for a number of years with being dragged through the media, some time in detention, having his home and business searched, sitting through two historical trials, reporting requirements, providing DNA samples and a descriptive enough leak to inform the public that he is the prime suspect at this fresh inquest. The evidence, (not the speculation, innuendo, gossip or coincidences) that the Strikeforce have on him, obviously does not meet the DPP's threshold, after 4 years. So, how did he do it, what did he do and what has he done with WT? Did he turn up to do a job and innocense met evil or did he plan it after giving a quote on the Tuesday, did he come back and scope the house? I also think that even with the threshold in a civil case for the historical charges being on the balance of probability, the victims have a strong chance of not being awarded damages.IMO

Hopefully the inquest will answer some or all of those questions for us. Not long now.

 

[Goosewhisperer]

Well, when you are defending the rest of your life against incarceration and it seems you have been acquitted, I guess you can afford a small smile... Especially if you haven't done anything wrong. I didn't see any smirk, i guess we see what we want to see. Upon examination of the video again, I see a woman trying to ignore a media pack in front of her and being self conscious, surely these ideas must have occurred to others on this forum. IMO

Much like when someone is convicted of murder and family members/friends of the victim show great elation and joy after the verdict? Human nature is a funny thing, we all have different reactions. Also, media show us what they want us to see, based on what will get the best reaction for them.

 

[purpleandgreen]

I’m sure there’ll be lots of elation and joy when William’s abductor is charged, found guilty and sentenced, no matter who he is.

But only because justice will finally be done for William and his families, and certainly NOT because this evil act was committed in the first place. IMO. For that I hope the perpetrator and his protectors all rot in hell.

 

[purpleandgreen]

I should have added the quote I was responding to which was Southaussie's # 16, quote, where her post was personalised towards me and found my position puzzling as she thought I was pro human rights. I'll clarify by saying I am pro human rights, I am deeply concerned in this case about civil rights and liberties, in regards to how the investigation is conducted, the way the police are harnessing the media, the long time dragging someone over the coals, casting doubt and suspicion upon them publicly but not charging them. If one has faith in the media and the police then I can see why one would think BS is guilty. If you are skeptical of these institutions, as I am, and analyse their methods, as I do, I am still willing to give this POI the benefit of the doubt. Based on the facts that he has a clean record, no one has placed him there at the time of the disappearance, he has been searched and provide DNA and statements and maintains his innocence, he has gone to trial twice for historical charges and is still walking around free and from what we do know of the NSW charges, there may have been another perp, and he has not been charged in relation to WT. IMO

Oh, I see. For some reason, it showed you replying to one of my posts, hence the confusion. Must be a WS glitch.

 

[kiwi50]

Does anyone know if a search dog would have been able to pick up Williams scent outside the property if he was being carried by an adult?
Just wondering how high a dog can pick up a scent.
If a dog could pick up a scent of someone being carried, it makes it even less likely that it was some random person on foot who got William, which brings it back to having to be a car.
If FG was expecting BS that morning, and his alibi doesnt check out, I just cant go past him as my #1 suspect.
I so hope Paul Savage saw him, but it probably only took seconds, so the odds arent great.

 

[frogwell]

Does anyone know if a search dog would have been able to pick up Williams scent outside the property if he was being carried by an adult?
Just wondering how high a dog can pick up a scent.
If a dog could pick up a scent of someone being carried, it makes it even less likely that it was some random person on foot who got William, which brings it back to having to be a car.
If FG was expecting BS that morning, and his alibi doesnt check out, I just cant go past him as my #1 suspect.
I so hope Paul Savage saw him, but it probably only took seconds, so the odds arent great.

Well, as was pointed out previously, using the 60 minutes interview, the FM says she rang BS that morning as the washing was piling up and she wanted to see when he would be returning with the part and left a message for him. The impression I am left with is they were not expecting him that morning or sitting around waiting for him to turn up. IMO

 

[sosocurious]

Well, as was pointed out previously, using the 60 minutes interview, the FM says she rang BS that morning as the washing was piling up and she wanted to see when he would be returning with the part and left a message for him. The impression I am left with is they were not expecting him that morning or sitting around waiting for him to turn up. IMO

Or he was expected as his son suggested, and she was calling to say "Where are you?"

Mr Spedding said his father had told him that he was supposed to repair a washing machine at the Kendall house where William disappeared from on September 12.
He said his father had coffee with his wife, Margaret, and then went to Laurieton Public School to watch his grandchildren in a ceremony on the morning William disappeared.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/wil...n-bill-spedding-says-son-20150429-1mvs9b.html

 

[frogwell]

Or he was expected as his son suggested, and she was calling to say "Where are you?"

Mr Spedding said his father had told him that he was supposed to repair a washing machine at the Kendall house where William disappeared from on September 12.
He said his father had coffee with his wife, Margaret, and then went to Laurieton Public School to watch his grandchildren in a ceremony on the morning William disappeared.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/wil...n-bill-spedding-says-son-20150429-1mvs9b.html

I think the sentence is ambiguous and in need of a comma between the words "house" and "where", which gives the sentence quite a different meaning. I would trust the words of the woman involved in the phonecall, not a 3rd party.

On another note, I wrote to the coroner's court asking if the public can attend the inquest and how to go about that, the following is a reply for those interested.

The Coroner has not yet decided whether the matter will be held in open court or not so I am unable to advise what arrangements are in place for the public.

The Coroner and the legal parties will discuss this at some time before the Inquest commences and the media will be advised. It will also be posted on the Coroners website.

Kind regards,

Ernie Harrington

 

[purpleandgreen]

some people laugh when theyre nervous, or maybe thats her putting on a brave face?
or she could be enjoying the attention, or the feeling of "us against them"

Or, sadly, some just think its funny.

‘Grin reaper’ confronted by TV reporter

So disgusted I have no words.

 

[Deleted member 102539]

Does anyone know if a search dog would have been able to pick up Williams scent outside the property if he was being carried by an adult?
Just wondering how high a dog can pick up a scent.
If a dog could pick up a scent of someone being carried, it makes it even less likely that it was some random person on foot who got William, which brings it back to having to be a car.
If FG was expecting BS that morning, and his alibi doesnt check out, I just cant go past him as my #1 suspect.
I so hope Paul Savage saw him, but it probably only took seconds, so the odds arent great.

It is unacceptable, after 4 years allegedly not to know (at least for the public), if BS was expected for the repair (IMO yes, he was, because the part for the washing machine should have been delivered to him on Thursday and the repair was urgently necessary as he knew) and who called whom on that fateful day, along with the sequence. As a lifelong repair man, BS would have known, that in this corner of Kendall the connection with a cell tower would be a problem. BS has relatives living there AFAIK and it wouldn't have been the first time, he was driving there. If a call from FG didn't reach him (IF), then it wouldn't have mattered, because he anyway was driving to her address (why not?? FG was waiting for him and the time of day wasn't exceptional).
Not only, that after 4 years we don't know, who called whom and why at all, no: in addition we don't know, why BS deleted some parts of his phone content, just this morning. That hodgepodge of discrepancies early on isn't even believable, if little WT hadn't disappeared, IMO.
I finally want to know, who is lying for 4 years now and I'm waiting for the inquest.