Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #61

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes I feel so sorry for the BM the way she has been treated without any respect. I don't think there is anything wrong with a woman drinking beer in the middle of the day as long as she was not still drinking it hours later. Perhaps people would rather she drank wine at lunch???? But was she drunk?
true
shes pictured having a midday beer..shame on her!

Meanwhile ladies are looooong lunching everywhere munching down moet (living their best life!)

The class barrier is very alive and problematic in this case.
 
Yes I feel so sorry for the BM the way she has been treated without any respect. I don't think there is anything wrong with a woman drinking beer in the middle of the day as long as she was not still drinking it hours later. Perhaps people would rather she drank wine lunch???? But was she drunk?
And it would not even have been remarked on if she was sitting in a North Shore restaurant drinking a glass of semillon sauvignon blanc at a ladies who lunch date.
 
It might be personality related. I also give way too much detail when asked questions. I think it is because I am extremely observant so I need to sift through all of the sensory details in my head when I am working out the answer.
Investigators that question a lot of people would probably know whether there is a personality type that also does this, even when they are not lying.

Experienced investigators working on a case definitely get a feel if someone is lying to them, and often go with their gut until they believe they know whether this is true or not. Sometimes they get it wrong - no-one's perfect. It can be more than a little frustrating if they know someone has committed a crime but they also know they don't have the evidence to prove it. I've seen it happen.
 
I'm not saying that FFC would have taken the children to see FGM on a visit between her husband's funeral and when WT went missing without permission. She would have asked for permission and actually that would be on FACS records which may or may not have ever been checked. When I said she could have lied, I meant maybe she did not disclose this visit to LE as this could have been when she took those photos. I think FFC could have been at boiling point with all the mucking around and thought if I can't adopt him, I can't face these visits with BM any more for another 14 years!
Its so strange that she didn't make a visit inbatween funeral and the last visit, being a older woman set in her ways with younger children even behaviour issues and having to muck around with BM visits when they may be spending alot of money on thies children with overseas holidays and waking in the middle of the night it she must be feeling like it seems all for nothing to be used and abused raising the children for the birth mother and for the birth mother to be able to go off hav more children and not let go of WT, if she can't adopt thies children whats it all for all this work for nothing, I feel that's were she was mentally she is only human she wanted long term sibling group and if she was in the motions for adoption obvious thats why she wanted the long term sibling group, maybe its easier to do an adoption on a sibling group, if it was me at their age I would of probably wanted to start off with one see how I go but to take two on its a big job to be in her late 40s running around after a 3yr old and its turning out to be a situation that he may be under the department until he is 18 and if that could affect the sisters adoption from happened because she is part of a sibling group so maby she will have to stay under the department until she is 18 so the department can keep them together as a sibling unit, with her age range there may only be a limited amount of time left to get a younger child and adopt them, and this could be a woman who has always had her own way and this may be the first time in her life that she hasn't been able to be in control, I know alot of people can only see this case through looking through the eyes of a paedophile but for some reason a can only see this case through the eyes of a rich well off woman who has always been in control and now something in her life is spinning out of control, especially the father he is close to WT i don't think he would give him up because of foster status and BM visits, who knows maby this woman can only see one option to re gain control over the situation, I totally think your right with the photos possibly being from another visit and I wonder if everything from the salvation army and department was looked into evey note about what the family have done and where they hav been
 
Who knows. Shocking choice of picture really further stigmatising the family while the other family has had the benefit of anonymity.
bingo!

100%

This is how I came to be supportive of them. The hypocrisy and shaming of them while the fosters enjoy anonomity scrutinising them very very unreasonable.

Especially when we know they were accounted for when William disappeared.
That at the end of the day is the critical point.

What do we actually know about the people last with him??? not a damn thing.

moo
 
She does interject, speak over him on a regular basis and generally seems a bit aggressive. However, my overall impression of him so far is that he has a more retiring personality. It's not unusual for one person to be more dominant in a relationship and she may be the one who wears the pants.

I'd like to know if they were unable to have a child of their own and that's the reason they fostered in the first place. How old was she when she started fostering the two children?

There is clear information that William & FF had a very close father/son bond.

FM found this relevant to tell the public.

Did the FM blame William for coming between her and FF?

Was William seen as a rival, resulting in resentment & jealousy, sometimes seen in step-child relationships?

Was FM envious of William?

Possibly. IMO.
 
Yeah , probably how it happened .. but that proves what ??

Can’t find link at moment but read several sources saying parents have employed lawyers .
As for child removal it has been said many many time in news child has been removed -
BBM Yes but you stated she had been placed with another foster family. I wondered if you had seen that stated in MSM?
 
IMO, this information is far too specific for NSWPOL just to be shaking the tree.

While they haven’t named the POI, we all know who they are talking about. If the public was getting it wrong, they would have released a statement by now denying the POI is who we all think.

NSW has just given a massive payout to a former POI for damage to his reputation. They wouldn’t be foolish enough to let it happen again. They will be getting solid legal advice on this one.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/n...y/news-story/a28c4a0fb12b8f24f52eea04ffada3c5
No Cookies | Daily Telegraph

How nervous would one be if they know where they left him.
 
I wonder how heavily frequented the area of bush land is that they are searching? It seems like a fair amount of fabric they are finding for a relatively remote area. Really hope we are near the end of the road for this investigation. If they are finally on the right track now thank goodness for whatever sparked them to change course.
 
There is clear information that William & FF had a very close father/son bond.

FM found this relevant to tell the public.

Did the FM blame William for coming between her and FF?

Was William seen as a rival, resulting in resentment & jealousy, sometimes seen in step-child relationships?

Was FM envious of William?

Possibly. IMO.
But wouldnt that make it really easy to hand him back?

They knew the bio's wanted him. It was always going to be hard to get the adoption done.

If the fm didnt really bond or want him I dont think she would have been so invested in keeping him.

moo
 
Given the strict privacy around adoptions I would not expect anything on the sister to be published other than speculation.

However, it has been said here that the bio parents contested the foster parents' adoption application (for both kids?) and lost. I don't know the source of that information, unless maybe the bio grandmother who has been publicly calling out aspects of the entire WT case.

oh really. .. I wasn’t aware they lost that case.

And, just my very un-professional opinion, but I’d wonder on what basis an adoption could be allowed when bio-parents are alive, have not surrender the children for adoption & the children are minors so cannot have applied for court order to ‘divorce’ their parents.

maybe someone with knowledge of the adoption laws can please advise.
 
But wouldnt that make it really easy to hand him back?

They knew the bio's wanted him. It was always going to be hard to get the adoption done.

If the fm didnt really bond or want him I dont think she would have been so invested in keeping him.

moo
I think that she would. She seems like a person who has to win.
 
How nervous would one be if they know where they left him.
Yes. And maybe that’s exactly what they are trying to do. If the POI is the FM, she has a psychopathy that has enabled her to do something terrible, to keep it to herself for so long and to avoid suspicion from very experienced police officers.

Perhaps NSWPOL is being guided by forensic psychologists.

Just speculation in my part.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
464
Total visitors
563

Forum statistics

Threads
608,256
Messages
18,236,892
Members
234,325
Latest member
davenotwayne
Back
Top