Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #60

[Tigerlily75]

Do William and his sister share the same biological father and mother? Or is it just the bio mother that they share and they have different bio Dads?

Same bio parents. There are 4 children altogether from the same two parents. BM retains custody of the younger two.

 

[they'll get you]

How so? If there are 2 different sides? Could be someone else trying to exercise control. IMO.

Feed the hyperactive children sweets and it’s the FP that pay the price when they are bouncing off the walls and screaming. It’s the FP that have the children 97% of the time, they are the true carers.

 

[HilaryHormone]

Did I read recently that they elected to Foster 'at risk kids' or words to that effect?

The vast majority of children in the system are there due to being at risk, for various reasons.

Has anyone found any further information on this?

"Emails from William's case worker in 2014 reveal the foster parents were making enquiries to adopt William and discussions were even had on the morning the little boy vanished."

Source

I believe the emails were between case workers and not with FFC that morning.

But, she was contemplating sending him back because he was a handful. I cant imagine that she had a bond with him and still had thoughts of sending him back. I find this the most suspicious part of this case.

How is this known, do you have a link? As far as I’ve come to understand it, there were workers involved in assessing the children to determine what emotional/behavioural support could be put in place.

I saw it mentioned that the FF personally applied for a supression order prior to media about WT's disappearance being published, as to protect their identities, which surely should have been protected by default due to foster requirements.

Can anyone confirm/deny, or has anyone seen any mention of this throughout this case?

I did read that somewhere recently too. So hard to determine what media reports are speculation or valid info gleaned from LE or courts etc. Are the statements published anywhere does anyone know?

BBM. I was a bit disturbed by the bio mums report that when they were on visits to the kids, the FF would interfere and bring the kids sweets and other treats.

I read that as the FFC would intervene when the parents gave the children unhealthy snacks. Which isn’t disturbing at all. She was caring for the children day to day, they had an established routine and may have been due to have lunch or dinner. Sugar may have been restricted (highly likely if WT had behaviour issues).

..And supervise visits and follow them. Unusual and creepy, IMO.

I don’t feel its fair for FC’s to be placed in a position to supervise visits, but if she was following them then it seems she was supervising contact IMO. That unfortunately entails following them and keeping eyes on the children at all times. For their care and protection. It can be an uncomfortable situation for everyone IMO, but stipulated within a care plan when parents are a flight risk for example.

With regards to the recently posted articles RE alleged forced adoption and WT being ‘handpicked’ for adoption, I did note that the family contact was only monthly. This is not very frequent and indicated, IMO, that visits were being reduced in line with progression of permanency planning. Not sure of the Australian system, but I have known older siblings to be adopted whilst younger siblings have remained in parents care, it’s dependent on the legal status and a variety of complex factors.

I do find it very hard to believe Australian services are punting children into care for no reason and pushing for illegal adoptions. If the system is anything like ours in the UK, it’s extremely difficult to remove a child in the first instance and very much a goal to rehabilitate and reunite families as quickly as possible. All MOO.

 

[PinkPower]

Is there a link to this article, please? And is there an explanation as to the context?

Just asking as a couple of posts back people are saying its to prevent the administration of sugar, which would be very valid


I also read that they discarded over $2000 in gifts the bio parents purchased for the children. Seems a little off, IMO.

Haven't heard that before. Link, please?

They ate Mcdonalds with the children on at least one occasion that we're aware of, can't see why a lollipop and Kinder Surprise would require such drastic interventions? Loads more sugar in a happy meal than those, IMO. FM clearly didn't see a problem with occasional sugary junk food treats.

Also according to CO's book, she fed her 3 year old weet-bix which is notoriously hard on little kids stomachs. I wonder if she put sugar on those ? They're pretty unpalatable without sugar and milk (which contains sugar) IMO.

 

[Random-me]

I also read that they discarded over $2000 in gifts the bio parents purchased for the children. Seems a little off, IMO.

Haven't heard that before. Link, please?

I think we need to remember this is just info coming from the BGM, and generally there are three sides to a story

She never liked the Spider-Man suit which has become nationally symbolic of the little boy, believing the dress-up outfit was showy and that her son BF had bought William better outfits.

“I hate the Spider-Man outfit.”

She said William’s foster parents had discarded $2000 in gifts given to William by BM and BF.

She says the boy’s foster parents have enough funds to go on holidays and enjoy themselves, while she is left to consider the demonisation of her own son and family.

She feels the NSW Police are on the “side” of the foster parents, and against her.

She lists a number of things she says they have failed to investigate, and says the case has been marred by “lies and bulls**t”.

No Cookies | The Chronicle

 

[interested64]

Right, so apparently the foster mother 'jumps out' to intervene when the bio parents gave the children lollipops and kinder surprises?

Still creepy, IMO.

Why..if he was adhd sugar will do no good..sounds more like the classic divorced angry parent routine.

 

[Milisi]

Anyway those freakin’ cars really existed!


There was a realestate photo Makara found of the house with those bloody cars in the background !

HERE but there’s a better one showing both cars.
View attachment 322860

Interesting, because part of her statements was that no-one ever, ever parked in the street

 

[PinkPower]

Interesting, because part of her statements was that no-one ever, ever parked in the street

Interesting when things look like evidence to support a claim, when in fact, it just disproves their claim. IMO.

 

[purpleandgreen]

I think we need to remember this is just info coming from the BGM, and generally there are three sides to a story


No Cookies | The Chronicle

Thanks, random. Didn't know it came from the BGM. Wouldn't have bothered with it.

 

[oviedo]

IMO, not sure it's her right to monitor how his bio parents interacted with him, or how they fed him. Quite shocked it was allowed by the FACS supervisor.

They only had visitation for 1 hour every 6-8 weeks. Wonder why she didn't just leave them alone?

I also read that they discarded over $2000 in gifts the bio parents purchased for the children. Seems a little off, IMO.

Do you have a link for the discarding of these gifts? I’ve not read this before so TIA

 

[Random-me]

Do you have a link for the discarding of these gifts? I’ve not read this before so TIA

Just above

 

[Oona]

Is it known whether FM had her phone with her when she drove FGM’s car looking for William?

 

[they'll get you]

Controlling much? MMO

Maybe it was doctors orders not to have sweets and sugars.

My girlfriend is rearing her grandchildren because her daughter was addicted while pregnant.
The baby was in withdrawal and has ADHD among other things because of the drug abuse.
My girlfriend says it’s like there is a sugar button that is pushed and that makes them go crazy.

 

[interested64]

comes across as insecure and " i want to be the fun mum"

Seems a little smothering, doesn't it? IMO.

I also read in CO's book that she tried to limit the visitations with the bio parents. Wasn't surprised. IMO.

How..fm would have been the one dealing with hyper William..I would be paissed if I was her and in 1 hr he had been fed sugar...no visits should happen with sweets being given out imo.

 

[PinkPower]

The vast majority of children in the system are there due to being at risk, for various reasons.



I believe the emails were between case workers and not with FFC that morning.



How is this known, do you have a link? As far as I’ve come to understand it, there were workers involved in assessing the children to determine what emotional/behavioural support could be put in place.



I did read that somewhere recently too. So hard to determine what media reports are speculation or valid info gleaned from LE or courts etc. Are the statements published anywhere does anyone know?



I read that as the FFC would intervene when the parents gave the children unhealthy snacks. Which isn’t disturbing at all. She was caring for the children day to day, they had an established routine and may have been due to have lunch or dinner. Sugar may have been restricted (highly likely if WT had behaviour issues).



I don’t feel its fair for FC’s to be placed in a position to supervise visits, but if she was following them then it seems she was supervising contact IMO. That unfortunately entails following them and keeping eyes on the children at all times. For their care and protection. It can be an uncomfortable situation for everyone IMO, but stipulated within a care plan when parents are a flight risk for example.

With regards to the recently posted articles RE alleged forced adoption and WT being ‘handpicked’ for adoption, I did note that the family contact was only monthly. This is not very frequent and indicated, IMO, that visits were being reduced in line with progression of permanency planning. Not sure of the Australian system, but I have known older siblings to be adopted whilst younger siblings have remained in parents care, it’s dependent on the legal status and a variety of complex factors.

I do find it very hard to believe Australian services are punting children into care for no reason and pushing for illegal adoptions. If the system is anything like ours in the UK, it’s extremely difficult to remove a child in the first instance and very much a goal to rehabilitate and reunite families as quickly as possible. All MOO.

The FF weren't required to be there for visitation, that is handled by FACS workers. IMO.

 

[Milisi]

I understand that. I had an infant die of SIDS and I knew she had died (I found her dead) but I hated leaving that house 12 years later. It was like I thought that she would not be remembered if we left. Totally illogical, but emotions sometimes are.

Sorry for your painful loss

 

[PrimeSuspect]

One benefit from identifying the FM as a POI so publicly is it sure gets people talking, maybe police are hoping to generate some leads in that direction.

The FP’s anonymity probably has protected them somewhat.

It's certainly got us talking again maybe at cross purposes but it's all good

 

[Waverider]

"I have no words" are words.

Sorry I had a little laugh about this comment, because in the police interview, the FM said exactly the same thing about having no words, and then proceeded with words.

Brilliant

 

[Jaded325594]

How..fm would have been the one dealing with hyper William..I would be paissed if I was her and in 1 hr he had been fed sugar...no visits should happen with sweets being given out imo.

For me, sugar and potential behavioural problems aside, if there's any truth to BGM's story, it does appear controlling and an attempt to undermine the biological parents relationship. Kinder surprises and lollipops may be how they show their love, FP should prioritise that relationship over a sugar reaction for the sake of the kids. It also contrasts with something the FFP said in the where is william podcast "we could never replace William's biological parents". Alarm bells.

 

[PinkPower]

For me, sugar and potential behavioural problems aside, if there's any truth to BGM's story, it does appear controlling and an attempt to undermine the biological parents relationship. Kinder surprises and lollipops may be how they show their love, FP should prioritise that relationship over a sugar reaction for the sake of the kids. It also contrasts with something the FFP said in the where is william podcast "we could never replace William's biological parents". Alarm bells.

Curious why the FF story is automatically believed and the Bio family stories are discounted. I wonder if this is a case of affluence affecting the perception of truth, etc. From watching the Birth mum's interviews, her body language looks very genuine and so does her grief. IMO.