Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #50

[Ms Kite]

How can we believe a person who decided to not provide crucial information until weeks months years after the fact.. if what RC saw that morning and who he saw was absolute truth any sane decent logical person who have either walked into a police station that day or at least phoned the station.. that information if true would have been a game changer as it would have gone from lil boy lost to lil boy stolen within 24hrs.. who wouldn’t inform police ASAP if that were truth.. in fact rc response to that question was he believed police were door knocking and so thought he would wait until they came to his front door.. really.. after 1 2 3 4 days still no knock ummmmmmm then surely you would go to them.. but no he still waited n waited n waited

IMO he is much more believable than the likes of the others that have featured in this investigation.

 

[sleepinoz]

I would love to hear Beacroft's reasoning for not believing FM saying he'd disappeared right before FD got home. Also Beacroft wasn't present when it happened (but FM and her mother were), so on what and how is she basing her theory of the time on? If PS had taken W from the neighbour's property half an hour before his wife left for bingo, where and how did he hide W for that half hour and how did he keep him quiet so as not to rouse his wife's suspicion that he'd stolen the neighbour's child? Then, after his wife left, what did he do with W then? Put tape on his mouth and hide him in a secret place in his house that for sure wouldn't be searched? (Police even opened up neighbour's attic accesses to check into them.)

If he made W unconscious, then how did he know that by the time W came to, and started screaming as he surely would be expected to, all the fuss on the street would be gone and nobody would hear him? (It wasn't, and they would have). We know his vehicle(s) was examined forensically, so he didn't take him anywhere in his vehicle(s). So if not unconscious, then did he kill him right away before his wife even left? And if so, why? The sheer logistics and circumstances here seem to suggest that it just wasn't possible for PS to have taken him and gotten away with it for five plus years?

What makes you think he would be screaming? If William was knocked over by a car he could have hit his head and died instantly.

 

[deugirtni]

Agree, it would be very interesting to know about her reaction to postlady, I’m usually here defending PS, but must say I’m thinking it wasnt a good look to be spending so long with lady in caravan, with an AVO against you. Surely Heather would have pointed that out to him.

As far as we know the caravan lady wasnt scared of him, so maybe some of the stuff with postlady was exaggerated or misconstrued.

Is it fair to suggest that PS should shorten his time spent chatting with females because one woman put an AVO on him? It seems he got to almost 70 years of age before he seemed to have this issue. I'm thinking if 'caravan lady' had any issue at all with him, GJ surely would have obtained a statement from her to detail what the issues were? There are always two sides to every story, and we're of course only hearing one of them. Perhaps your suggestion that the postie's accusations were misconstrued or exaggerated are correct, .. just kind of took him the wrong way, ie perhaps him joking around and she believed he was serious or something?

 

[Ms Kite]

What makes you think he would be screaming? If William was knock over by a car he could have hit his head and died instantly.

Personally, I think it's unlikely that he was accidently run over. Surely the sniffer dogs would've picked up his scent on the street if that had happened. I think Jublelin was using that line of thinking as a soft option for PS to take up in the first instance if he had guilt to offload.

 

[sleepinoz]

Is it fair to suggest that PS should shorten his time spent chatting with females because one woman put an AVO on him? It seems he got to almost 70 years of age before he seemed to have this issue. I'm thinking if 'caravan lady' had any issue at all with him, GJ surely would have obtained a statement from her to detail what the issues were? There are always two sides to every story, and we're of course only hearing one of them. Perhaps your suggestion that the postie's accusations were misconstrued or exaggerated are correct, .. just kind of took him the wrong way, ie perhaps him joking around and she believed he was serious or something?

One Woman? One is enough IMO

Do we know for sure that there haven't been other incidents? Possibly but not for sure. We don't know any of his history past what we've been told.

 

[JLZ]

I would love to hear Beacroft's reasoning for not believing FM saying he'd disappeared right before FD got home. Also Beacroft wasn't present when it happened (but FM and her mother were), so on what and how is she basing her theory of the time on? If PS had taken W from the neighbour's property half an hour before his wife left for bingo, where and how did he hide W for that half hour and how did he keep him quiet so as not to rouse his wife's suspicion that he'd stolen the neighbour's child? Then, after his wife left, what did he do with W then? Put tape on his mouth and hide him in a secret place in his house that for sure wouldn't be searched? (Police even opened up neighbour's attic accesses to check into them.)

If he made W unconscious, then how did he know that by the time W came to, and started screaming as he surely would be expected to, all the fuss on the street would be gone and nobody would hear him? (It wasn't, and they would have). We know his vehicle(s) was examined forensically, so he didn't take him anywhere in his vehicle(s). So if not unconscious, then did he kill him right away before his wife even left? And if so, why? The sheer logistics and circumstances here seem to suggest that it just wasn't possible for PS to have taken him and gotten away with it for five plus years?

One scenario would be that PS lured and concealed William with the intention of making the family worry and come looking for him. "Well I would have brought him back but you told me not to come near you." But PS hid William somewhere dangerous and by the time Heather, running late, had gone, William had suffocated.

 

[WhiteLion^^]

Is it fair to suggest that PS should shorten his time spent chatting with females because one woman put an AVO on him? It seems he got to almost 70 years of age before he seemed to have this issue. I'm thinking if 'caravan lady' had any issue at all with him, GJ surely would have obtained a statement from her to detail what the issues were? There are always two sides to every story, and we're of course only hearing one of them. Perhaps your suggestion that the postie's accusations were misconstrued or exaggerated are correct, .. just kind of took him the wrong way, ie perhaps him joking around and she believed he was serious or something?

I don't think anyone can get an AVO applied that easily. Court appearances, statements, are needed, etc, to get one. IMO

Applying for an AVO through the Police - Step by step guide

 

[SouthAussie]

I would love to hear Beacroft's reasoning for not believing FM saying he'd disappeared right before FD got home. Also Beacroft wasn't present when it happened (but FM and her mother were), so on what and how is she basing her theory of the time on? If PS had taken W from the neighbour's property half an hour before his wife left for bingo, where and how did he hide W for that half hour and how did he keep him quiet so as not to rouse his wife's suspicion that he'd stolen the neighbour's child? Then, after his wife left, what did he do with W then? Put tape on his mouth and hide him in a secret place in his house that for sure wouldn't be searched? (Police even opened up neighbour's attic accesses to check into them.)

If he made W unconscious, then how did he know that by the time W came to, and started screaming as he surely would be expected to, all the fuss on the street would be gone and nobody would hear him? (It wasn't, and they would have). We know his vehicle(s) was examined forensically, so he didn't take him anywhere in his vehicle(s). So if not unconscious, then did he kill him right away before his wife even left? And if so, why? The sheer logistics and circumstances here seem to suggest that it just wasn't possible for PS to have taken him and gotten away with it for five plus years?

I am reminded that the rape (sorry) of a child frequently happens quite quickly, with their demise occurring right after.
For example, little Cherish Perrywinkle was abducted (and taken a short distance away), raped then strangled within a very short time.
I am also reminded that rape is not so much a sexual crime as it is more of a violent and angry crime.

With William's asthmatic condition, his demise may have been accidental. Cover the child's mouth to stop any noise, asthma kicks in ......

I don't know that we are looking at any significant time span for William to have been kept quiet.

As well, to me, it seems that a person who is extremely familiar with the bush in that area might know of any and many areas that are more concealed.

 

[Chrissy74]

I personally don't know if Mr Craddock read the time from Mr Savage's statement or from information provided from police files. Do you have anything that verifies the times were read by Mr Craddock from a statement?

The time was given by PS himself when answering a question from Craddock at August inquest

 

[Chrissy74]

Why?? Because we haven’t been told anything shady about him.... yet.. how good is his eyesight at his age I wonder? Was he wearing glasses? If this car with a woman driving was going as fast as he claims then how can we be so certain on the details he gave regarding the woman’s age colour of top size of body and colour n style of their hair which was apparently in a bun.. RC got all that information as well as William sitting in the back of that car, unrestrained, looking out the window, wearing his Spider-Man suit n not crying.. all that information in let’s say 5seconds..seems a lil too good to be true

IMO he is much more believable than the likes of the others that have featured in this investigation.

 

[deugirtni]

I thought it was Beacroft who said that she 'didn't believe' Savage was still an 'active' POI. Sounds to me that she isn't sure as she is likely no longer involved in the seemingly-much-reduced investigation. This may not be an entire 'police' opinion.
What is a non-active POI? Perhaps one that is still on the list but the investigation into them has stalled (for however long).

Detective Beacroft today said she believed Mr Savage was no longer an "active" person of interest, despite there there being nothing which could rule him out.
Police made secret recordings of William Tyrrell person of interest Paul Savage speaking to dead wife

I am not sure that we can state that a trial is at risk when ...
1. We have no idea who would be put on trial for this crime
2. We have no idea if the current judge is going to agree or disagree that Jubes had a legal and legitimate operational right to make those recordings.

Just noting that 10NewsFirst, the outlet that Lia Harris seems to work for, refers to PS as 'former person of interest', after their reporter LH being in court every day and hearing all of what has been said.
Lia Harris Retweeted
10 News First Sydney
@10NewsFirstSyd·Feb 7
The former person of interest in the William Tyrrell case has testified in the criminal hearing for former lead detective Gary Jubelin, with Paul Savage telling the court his privacy had been invaded. |
@LiaJHarris
Sandra Sully on Twitter

 

[SouthAussie]

Just noting that 10NewsFirst, the outlet that Lia Harris seems to work for, refers to PS as 'former person of interest', after their reporter LH being in court every day and hearing all of what has been said.
Lia Harris Retweeted
10 News First Sydney
@10NewsFirstSyd·Feb 7
The former person of interest in the William Tyrrell case has testified in the criminal hearing for former lead detective Gary Jubelin, with Paul Savage telling the court his privacy had been invaded. |
@LiaJHarris
Sandra Sully on Twitter

Yes, a bit like Spedding being a former person of interest. To me, 'former' does not specifically exclude 'current'. 'Former' just makes a lawsuit against the media less likely, with no certainty of a specific perpetrator as of yet.
As Beacroft stated, there has been nothing found to exclude Savage as a POI.

Detective Beacroft today said she believed Mr Savage was no longer an "active" person of interest, despite there there being nothing which could rule him out.
Police made secret recordings of William Tyrrell person of interest Paul Savage speaking to dead wife

 

[sleepinoz]

Sergeant Beacroft has since left the investigation, but when asked whether Mr Savage was still considered a person of interest, she said: “No. To my knowledge, he’s not an active person of interest.”

NoCookies | The Australian

I doubt that Beacroft is in a position to say that PS is or isn't an Active POI. She is no longer on the task force, so IMO wouldn't know the current situation.

 

[deugirtni]

What makes you think he would be screaming? If William was knocked over by a car he could have hit his head and died instantly.

Yes, but whether W disappeared just before FD got home as FM has relayed, or whether he disappeared just after 10am as Beacroft theorizes, both of those are before HS left for bingo. It seems that people are suggesting he was laying down under the balcony at FGM's house listening to convos and such, and saw W and got up and ran after him and took him. I'm saying he would be screaming when he awoke if PS had rendered him unconscious and hidden him for later abuse. All of that sounds just too way out there, imho.

The theory about running into him with a car.. why would they hide that? It wouldn't have been like it was deliberate and it wasn't even like they'd be expecting or necessarily looking out for a small child behind their vehicle when backing out or whatever. People get into their habits about driving, and how they pull out of their driveways and such, and I could see that as a possibility for sure, I just can't see why the couple would have hidden it, - at least ongoing for over five years? They really, imo, had nothing to lose by admitting it, other than embarrassment perhaps, and grief and sadness, possibly depression, etc. But admitting it wouldn't have been like they'd go to prison for it, right?

By the time GJ set his sights on PS, PS could simply have blamed it on his deceased wife even if he'd done it himself, and been done with it - admitted he covered it up for her because she just could not handle the grief and especially on top of her illness, etc. I think police would have been understanding and not too harsh with him or them. imo. Also, they had examined the vehicle(s). It would be interesting to know if only one of them, or both, and whether HS's vehicle was still owned when GJ set his sights on PS. In September 2014, surely police checked out all of the neighbours' vehicles for signs of hitting something?

 

[Chrissy74]

Yes good call but was ps that smart to think of that before digging himself a hole with his statements.. my impression is that he’s cocky more than he is clever

Yes, but whether W disappeared just before FD got home as FM has relayed, or whether he disappeared just after 10am as Beacroft theorizes, both of those are before HS left for bingo. It seems that people are suggesting he was laying down under the balcony at FGM's house listening to convos and such, and saw W and got up and ran after him and took him. I'm saying he would be screaming when he awoke if PS had rendered him unconscious and hidden him for later abuse. All of that sounds just too way out there, imho.

The theory about running into him with a car.. why would they hide that? It wouldn't have been like it was deliberate and it wasn't even like they'd be expecting or necessarily looking out for a small child behind their vehicle when backing out or whatever. People get into their habits about driving, and how they pull out of their driveways and such, and I could see that as a possibility for sure, I just can't see why the couple would have hidden it, - at least ongoing for over five years? They really, imo, had nothing to lose by admitting it, other than embarrassment perhaps, and grief and sadness, possibly depression, etc. But admitting it wouldn't have been like they'd go to prison for it, right?

By the time GJ set his sights on PS, PS could simply have blamed it on his deceased wife even if he'd done it himself, and been done with it - admitted he covered it up for her because she just could not handle the grief and especially on top of her illness, etc. I think police would have been understanding and not too harsh with him or them. imo. Also, they had examined the vehicle(s). It would be interesting to know if only one of them, or both, and whether HS's vehicle was still owned when GJ set his sights on PS. In September 2014, surely police checked out all of the neighbours' vehicles for signs of hitting something?

 

[deugirtni]

One Woman? One is enough IMO

Do we know for sure that there haven't been other incidents? Possibly but not for sure. We don't know any of his history past what we've been told.

We also don't know anything about the postie's past history and whether she has put out AVOs on other men in the past? I know for a fact there are at least *some* crazy-ladies in the world, who might totally misconstrue things. I think we haven't found any criminal convictions against PS? But meanwhile, we do know there have been criminal accusations and/or convictions featuring children in regard to some other POIs such as BS, FA, RD? Wouldn't it have slipped out about PS as well if that were the case?

 

[Blues Clues]

I personally don't know if Mr Craddock read the time from Mr Savage's statement or from information provided from police files. Do you have anything that verifies the times were read by Mr Craddock from a statement?

I attended the inquest. Craddock took PS through his statement asking him to confirm each point. DrSleuth who also attended has provided a script of the q & a between Craddock and PS which is here in earlier threads. (thank you DrSleuth much appreciated). Sorry I have no idea how to search for them, but DrSleuth has provided the dialogue which outlines what Savage said in his statement as to the time HS left in a post above.

Savage was also taken through the walk-through by Craddock in the same manner.

This link doesn't contain the relevant q & a in reference to the time HS left, but it indicates Craddock was asking PS to confirm what was in his statement made on Sept 25th '14.

Neighbour asked what he saw on day William Tyrrell vanished

 

[Chrissy74]

We also don't know anything about the postie's past history and whether she has put out AVOs on other men in the past? I know for a fact there are at least *some* crazy-ladies in the world, who might totally misconstrue things. I think we haven't found any criminal convictions against PS? But meanwhile, we do know there have been criminal accusations and/or convictions featuring children in regard to some other POIs such as BS, FA, RD? Wouldn't it have slipped out about PS as well if that were the case?

Are we discussing what we know to be factual or are we discussing a one in a hundred possibility?

 

[Green beans]

We also don't know anything about the postie's past history and whether she has put out AVOs on other men in the past? I know for a fact there are at least *some* crazy-ladies in the world, who might totally misconstrue things. I think we haven't found any criminal convictions against PS? But meanwhile, we do know there have been criminal accusations and/or convictions featuring children in regard to some other POIs such as BS, FA, RD? Wouldn't it have slipped out about PS as well if that were the case?

FGM asked HS to tell her husband to stop coming to her home, as he was standing at her back door, un announced.

 

[deugirtni]

Yes, a bit like Spedding being a former person of interest. To me, 'former' does not specifically exclude 'current'. 'Former' just makes a lawsuit against the media less likely, with no certainty of a specific perpetrator as of yet.
As Beacroft stated, there has been nothing found to exclude Savage as a POI.

Detective Beacroft today said she believed Mr Savage was no longer an "active" person of interest, despite there there being nothing which could rule him out.
Police made secret recordings of William Tyrrell person of interest Paul Savage speaking to dead wife

Sergeant Beacroft has since left the investigation, but when asked whether Mr Savage was still considered a person of interest, she said: “No. To my knowledge, he’s not an active person of interest.”

NoCookies | The Australian

I doubt that Beacroft is in a position to say that PS is or isn't an Active POI. She is no longer on the task force, so IMO wouldn't know the current situation.

Admittedly, it would be better if they would ask someone currently directly involved in the case to answer that question, however my guess is that word on this case travels fast within the department and especially amongst those who have worked on the case, present and past. Like others have pointed out however, if PS were ever accused and put on trial, I would hate to think about testimony and evidence being ruled out because all of this was aired publicly in the past. Where is 'Cleaver Green'? imo.