Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #41

[frogwell]

I would have thought that all concerned parties would be aware that the BM was in court over the matter?


The mother told the court she was aware of adoption plans before William disappeared but not in any detail and "didn't agree" with them.
"We were still trying to get the children back. We were at court," she said.
William Tyrrell's parents 'hid him' as bub

And who informed her? she did not state her source at the inquest (and again, the counsel assisting the coroner did not pursue with her who the source was) and the case worker denied ever informing her plans for adoption. But having become aware of the plans, she has been fighting it out in court.

 

[frogwell]

I cannot locate a street named 'Moore' in Kendall as quoted in the media article as quoting the FFC. anyone have any clues to what 'Moore' refers to?

I looked it up too, I think she just meant that she proceeded further, more. IMO

 

[louisepiglet]

I don't think it is strange that the FFC's mind went to thoughts of abduction. I think it is all parents greatest fear and I know the few times my children were lost or suddenly out of my sight the thought was lurking.
Horrible horrible feeling.

 

[papertrail]

You are right, he was parentally abducted from the Minister's care, at that point in time.
Which resulted in a delay of 6 or so weeks before William was placed into the hands of his waiting carers.
I believe that the FF would be aware that the BM was opposed to the permanent placement.
The possibility of another 'intervention' by the BF would likely not be far from the FF's minds. imo


"William Tyrrell was always intended to stay in foster care for the rest of his childhood, away from his 'career criminal' father.
The young missing boy's mother ..... was also believed to have known of the intention for the arrangement."
William Tyrrell's foster placement was to be permanent

The bio parents never abducted William from the Minister's care as you have stated. The bio parents had not cooperated in handing William over when initially requested to do so. A little different than 'abducted' as far as I know.

 

[frogwell]

So in reality, the FFC may have thought of abduction quickly as there was an adoption process occurring and a challenge to that also occurring in the courts at the time of his disappearance. We have been informed through MSM that none of that has any bearing on WT's disappearance. The BM, BD, MFC and FFC have been cleared of the act of abduction on the day WT disappeared, this does not include other family or associates being potentially responsible for his disappearance.

 

[papertrail]

But how would he know about the BM objection to the permanent placement. According to his evidence, he had never informed the biological family. Also, FaCs and the case worker gave evidence at the inquest that the placement up until the alleged abduction had been co operative and amicable, if there was hostility from the bios they wereobliged to inform the FC's which never happened. Although I am under the impression that WT's sister was already placed with the carers when it was decided that he would be placed with them, the MSM has stated that he went to the FC's at nine months old and she was placed with them 1 week after he was. After that, their experiences with the bios were apparently uneventful for 2.5 years.

And I understand from BM testimony that she had not been made aware the intention of William's placement with FF was to be made a permanent arrangement. Very sad.

 

[papertrail]

So in reality, the FFC may have thought of abduction quickly as there was an adoption process occurring and a challenge to that also occurring in the courts at the time of his disappearance. We have been informed through MSM that none of that has any bearing on WT's disappearance. The BM, BD, MFC and FFC have been cleared of the act of abduction on the day WT disappeared, this does not include other family or associates being potentially responsible for his disappearance.

Then that story that broke in the media not long before the Inquest commenced in which the mother of a former boyfriend of BM stated her son believed he was William's father. Furthermore that her son had hidden William in an aboriginal community somewhere. Very strange timing. The mother appeared on a BM social media page. Large tall woman with red hair and holding a very young William.

 

[sosocurious]

The bio parents never abducted William from the Minister's care as you have stated. The bio parents had not cooperated in handing William over when initially requested to do so. A little different than 'abducted' as far as I know.

Hiding with help and ignoring court orders. What is the word for that?

 

[frogwell]

Hiding with help and ignoring court orders. What is the word for that?

parental love/bonding?, desparation?, maternal, paternal instinct?

 

[papertrail]

Hiding with help and ignoring court orders. What is the word for that?

I don't believe you can 'abduct' someone that is your child and in your custody at the time.

 

[SouthAussie]

Hiding with help and ignoring court orders. What is the word for that?

Apparently, the law calls it a "flagrant disregard" for a court ordered custody arrangement.

The mother and the grandmother in this case both went to jail for 'contempt of court' over their disregard.
'Flagrant disregard': Mother jailed for going on the run with kids despite custody arrangement

 

[papertrail]

Great detail from Frogwell in thread 40 re Inquest.....

frogwellWell-Known Member
FaCs made orders when WT was about 9 months old to remove him as BD and BM wanted to remain in a relationship together. They decided to abscond, BD says he was the main drive behind that idea and BM says she just couldn't bring herself to hand WT over. They approached BD's father's wife who talked of it with his father and they put them up for an indeterminate amount of time but they were picked up by the police in a private rental they had obtained in Gordon, 4-5 weeks after they absconded. In the time they absconded, WT's sister had a birthday and they didn't visit as they were in hiding. Coroner said that must have been a very hard time for you making that choice to which BM agreed. They had no real plan and weren't thinking very hard ahead. BM described herself as incarcerated after that event, but no idea for how long and if it was specifically around this incident. When they absconded she did present to FaCs minus WT. Orders were made after WT was retrieved that he be in the care of the minister until he was 18. BM and BD were granted 6 supervised visits per year with the proviso that if things went well with the visits that they could apply to get more which she did apply for. She regularly attended. BD when he could as he was working 6 days a week and trying to make life better for everyone, they wanted to work to have the children back into their own care. BM was asked was she aware of the care plans being made for WT moving forward and an application for adoption. She said she read it in the report. According to people at the court who were listening to the testimony on Monday, the case worker was crying when asked this question and said that the biologicals had not been informed. BD stated that he had not been informed prior to WT going missing. BM said she probably would have told BD, she did tell her family and she did tell BD's family. She stated that she was not happy about it and didn't want that to happen. BD said that in the scheme of things he doesn't really think about the adoption issue and is only thinking about where WT could be, what's happened to him.

 

[stormbird]

<snipped by stormbird>As she [FFC] was heading back up the road with AMS towards the FFCM's house, Chris Rowley the 1st responder met the FFC on the street. He then went straight to the house and she continued searching on the street until she was called in to give information to the police. <snipped>

That seems so weird to me I just want to check whether it might not be correct? I can't imagine calling the police and then not going to see them straight away when they arrive.

 

[frogwell]

That seems so weird to me I just want to check whether it might not be correct? I can't imagine calling the police and then not going to see them straight away when they arrive.

She flagged him when she saw his car in the street and he pulled over to the place where the 2 cars had been parked earlier in the day. she told him who she was etc, he then went to the FFCM's house and the FFC went on searching, my understanding is that CR would have met the FFCM and MFC at the house and talked to them 1st before calling the FFC back to the house.

 

[stormbird]

She flagged him when she saw his car in the street and he pulled over to the place where the 2 cars had been parked earlier in the day. she told him who she was etc, he then went to the FFCM's house and the FFC went on searching, my understanding is that CR would have met the FFCM and MFC at the house and talked to them 1st before calling the FFC back to the house.

Thank you. (And thank you for all your inquest notes - they're much better than the reports by MSM.)

I wonder how CR called FFC back to the house. It probably doesn't make much difference. But if it was by phone, FFC could have been out driving.

 

[Deleted member 161976]

I don't think it is strange that the FFC's mind went to thoughts of abduction. I think it is all parents greatest fear and I know the few times my children were lost or suddenly out of my sight the thought was lurking.
Horrible horrible feeling.

agree,me too

 

[papertrail]

And who informed her? she did not state her source at the inquest (and again, the counsel assisting the coroner did not pursue with her who the source was) and the case worker denied ever informing her plans for adoption. But having become aware of the plans, she has been fighting it out in court.

I recall BM stated she made the discovery of William's permanency with Fcarers when she read a report and I believe this occurred after sweet William disappeared.

The questioning of the male Care Agency worker about taking photos of William and whether he had shared images with anyone is at the front of my mind. The questioning included whether William was wearing the spider suit at the time and the answer was yes.

 

[papertrail]

That seems so weird to me I just want to check whether it might not be correct? I can't imagine calling the police and then not going to see them straight away when they arrive.

I agree that scenario would be very strange. One would consider the 1st responder's immediate actions would be to sit down with whoever was in contact with William and go through timelines and William's character traits ie if he would wander and his personality type then the responder would report back to HQ to Macquarie local area command. I would imagine that FACS would have been contacted by police too.

I am not sure in my mind and in hindsight the 1st responder granting a neighbour permission to put out a social media alert so early was the right action. The scene became quickly contaminated with human scents, footprints, tyre tracks etc. The sniffer hounds would have become confused.

I believe FFC and MFC would then possibly have rejoined search parties coordinated by police or SES personnel.

 

[papertrail]

It was widely announced in media prior to inquest starting that suspicion had fallen on a new suspect who was to appear on 1st day of Inquest. The FACS worker who captured a photo of William and was questioned whether he shared the photo and answered no and appeared very early on 1st day.

The pic of William on SFR pinboard that appeared in 60 mins doco shows William in spider suit. The thing is to me the background of that photo doesn't appear to be at Fcarers home. Stickers on wall etc.


It was detailed at Inquest the bio parents had supervised access visits and these occurred at a Ryde shopping centre. The FACS worker would deliver the children for these visits. The spider suit was purchased by Fcarers in Bali so the FACS worker pic was taken not long before the disappearance.

Did the FACS worker take William to their own home at some stage and that is why the pic background is questioned by me? Is such a ho
me visit permitted? Why was that photo on the SFR pinboard? Why was the FACS worker questioned about a photograph? I don't believe the photo in question was shown at Inquest. There are no reports it was.

We know from evidence at Inquest William had suffered a badly bruised face due to an accident whilst playing with FFC a couple of weeks prior to his disappearance and the bruise was still visible on day of disappearance and was visible at time of last supervised access vist near end of August 2014. We also know that FACS had become involved in assisting with behaviour type issues.

Is it in the realm of possibility that a certain person....not bio or foster family connected, took it upon themselves to 'rescue' William from their twisted perception of an unsuitable home life and the pending adoption process.

I want to make it crystal clear I am in no way insinuating involvement of bio or foster parents or their families.

 

[dragon52]

Great detail from Frogwell in thread 40 re Inquest.....

frogwellWell-Known Member
FaCs made orders when WT was about 9 months old to remove him as BD and BM wanted to remain in a relationship together. They decided to abscond, BD says he was the main drive behind that idea and BM says she just couldn't bring herself to hand WT over. They approached BD's father's wife who talked of it with his father and they put them up for an indeterminate amount of time but they were picked up by the police in a private rental they had obtained in Gordon, 4-5 weeks after they absconded. In the time they absconded, WT's sister had a birthday and they didn't visit as they were in hiding. Coroner said that must have been a very hard time for you making that choice to which BM agreed. They had no real plan and weren't thinking very hard ahead. BM described herself as incarcerated after that event, but no idea for how long and if it was specifically around this incident. When they absconded she did present to FaCs minus WT. Orders were made after WT was retrieved that he be in the care of the minister until he was 18. BM and BD were granted 6 supervised visits per year with the proviso that if things went well with the visits that they could apply to get more which she did apply for. She regularly attended. BD when he could as he was working 6 days a week and trying to make life better for everyone, they wanted to work to have the children back into their own care. BM was asked was she aware of the care plans being made for WT moving forward and an application for adoption. She said she read it in the report. According to people at the court who were listening to the testimony on Monday, the case worker was crying when asked this question and said that the biologicals had not been informed. BD stated that he had not been informed prior to WT going missing. BM said she probably would have told BD, she did tell her family and she did tell BD's family. She stated that she was not happy about it and didn't want that to happen. BD said that in the scheme of things he doesn't really think about the adoption issue and is only thinking about where WT could be, what's happened to him.

Interesting. I must say that when I first heard about the caseworker being an employee of an agency that is outsourced by FACS I was uneasy. Especially as the said agency had employees that had been investigated for paedophilia.
The biological mother had also complained on her last access visit that apart from William being underweight and bruised he seemed very quiet and clingy towards her.