Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #63

[Warshawski]

Just a comment re the AVO-

I’m not in NSW but in all my years of working in foster care and kinship care, I have never heard of an AVO being taken out against a carer when there has been an allegation (of any kind) made against them. I doubt they would have done so if it wasn’t for the backdrop of WT’s disappearance.

What normally would happen in my state at least is that a police special child abuse team would be involved to interview the child, potentially lay charges (though again I have never seen a case where what was alleged to have happened led to charges- the majority of physical abuse allegations I dealt with were smacking which carers are not allowed to do).

The child can be removed regardless of the police’s involvement or subsequent action- the level of evidence required is lower than what is required for court. It’s a matter of determining the ‘likelihood’ that it happened, so Eg. Was there a witness, injuries, do the stories match up etc. the police can also take quite a long time to investigate and lay charges so sometimes it’s a matter of urgency to remove the child before the police get around to doing anything formal. Hypothetically the presence of a bruise and information from the child to indicate that it was caused by a carer would be plenty of evidence to remove a child, so an AVO isn’t generally necessary.

Hi Stranger & thanks for sharing your experienced info.
Imo the AVO was not simply to remove LT from the FF home.

Conditions of an Apprehended Violence Order (AVO)
Mandatory Order:-

1. The defendant must not do any of the following to <protected people>, or anyone <she/he/they> <has/have> a domestic relationship with:

A) assault or threaten <her/him/them>,

B) stalk, harass or intimidate <her/him/them>, and

C) deliberately or recklessly destroy or damage anything that belongs to <protected people>.

Additional Orders:-
Additional orders can be sought depending on the circumstances, for example:

Restrictions put in place against the Defendant:

• No longer allowed to reside at the family home
• Not allowed to contact the protected person except through the use of a lawyer,
• Not allowed within a certain distance from the protected person/s residence, work or school.
• Not allowed to be in the company of protected person for at least 12 hours after taking alcohol or drugs.
• Not allowed to possess any firearms or prohibited weapons.
• Not allowed to try and locate the Protected Person.

I’ve just been served with an AVO, what does that mean? What do I do?

 

[Waverider]

BBM: The first mention that we have a link for.

I am pretty sure that absolutely no-one here has seen the notes that the responding officers have about their first conversations with FM.

There is no way that we know even a small fraction of what is in the police brief.

imo

Yes, based on the evidence to which we are privy, this is the first mention of any drive, including the 000 call. Subsequent statements / recollections as per the posts above including the 60 minutes and 2GB interviews also fail to mention the drive, or explain how it could have fit into the timeframe.

You’re quite correct that we don’t have all of the information regarding police statements - she could’ve mentioned seeing unicorns for all we know! But based on the evidence, which is all we can go on, day 6 is the first mention of any drive.
JMO

 

[jsiar]

I have to say, all these inconsistencies popping up with the comparison between the various interviews is quite mind boggling. I knew they were there but seeing them put to paper is very interesting.
Also reading & hearing these interviews with a new perspective, they do seem to come across as way too wordy, like not answering the questions, just rambling on about..stuff. I don’t understand why so many words. IMO.

 

[JBowie]

Hi Stranger & thanks for sharing your experienced info.
Imo the AVO was not simply to remove LT from the FF home.

True, police need some grounds for seeking an AVO.

 

[PrimeSuspect]

The link and timeline information I put upthread a little while ago with a link to the audio - Lia Harris 2015 part 1.

I have mentioned where it is and in which source. Post #931

This is going round in circles,
I've listened to the podcast, no where does the FM say she hasn't seen her mother since the dad has died, or since he's been put in the ground, or for 7 mths.

 

[SouthAussie]

Yes, based on the evidence to which we are privy, this is the first mention of any drive, including the 000 call. Subsequent statements / recollections as per the posts above including the 60 minutes and 2GB interviews also fail to mention the drive, or explain how it could have fit into the timeframe.

You’re quite correct that we don’t have all of the information regarding police statements - she could’ve mentioned seeing unicorns for all we know! But based on the evidence, which is all we can go on, day 6 is the first mention of any drive.
JMO

The point of my post is that we cannot take these things as absolutes. imo

The family hadn't been to Kendall in 7 months does not equal FM not seeing her mum for 7 months.

Seeing FM on her walkthrough video saying that she drove to the end of the street and down the road a little does not equal that this is the first time she mentioned it to the police. I feel sure she previously mentioned various things to the police that were later included in her walkthrough video (and if I watched it again I might be able to point some of those things out.)

 

[JBowie]

But based on the evidence, which is all we can go on, day 6 is the first mention of any drive.
JMO

And I'm trying to imagine police not then asking: "Why is this the first time that you have mentioned this?"

 

[Megnut]

If a person hadn't been back in months and didn't live there, even if two cars were parked on the road, how would that person be able to determine it to be unusual?

And if there were cars there, and if it was truly unusual, wouldn't the people who actually lived there be more likely than less likely to have solid recollections thereof?

JMO, trying to make sense of the senseless

 

[JBowie]

This is going round in circles,
I've listened to the podcast, no where does the FM say she hasn't seen her mother since the dad has died, or since he's been put in the ground, or for 7 mths.

See post #921.

 

[Ytho]

DBM

 

[Waverider]

The point of my post is that we cannot take these things as absolutes.

The family hadn't been to Kendall in 7 months does not equal FM not seeing her mum for 7 months.

Seeing FM on her walkthrough video saying that she drove to the end of the street and down the road a little does not equal that this is the first time she mentioned it to the police. I feel sure she previously mentioned lots of things to the police that were later included in her walkthrough video (and if I watched it again I might be able to point some of those things out.)

BBM

You’re attacking the straw man here, I’m afraid.

My point, to reiterate, is that we must be evidence-based. And based on the evidence, day 6 is the first time she mentioned a drive anywhere. If evidence emerges to the contrary, then I’ll adjust my beliefs accordingly. But what she may or may not have said to police in unreleased statements isn’t evidence.

 

[Warshawski]

'It felt like a scream': William's carer

Anne Maree Sharpley said the foster mother was "rather upset" and told her words to the effect of: "He's either hit his head and can't answer me or somebody's taken him because he knows to answer me."

also, I believe that Anne Maree Sharley might possibly be hankering after that Gilded Lily...

 

[Waverider]

And I'm trying to imagine police not then asking: "Why is this the first time that you have mentioned this?"

Me too!!

 

[Trmtrm2]

The local paper is delivered every week and delivered either the Wednesday or Thursday.

The Camden Haven's own newspaper. Based in Laurieton and covering all news, sport and community events in our district. Free every Wednesday.
Log in or sign up to view

The Camden Haven's own newspaper.
Camden Haven Courier is a free, home-delivered publication, with high penetration within Laurieton and the Camden Haven region each week. The Courier covers all local news issues, sports, schools and entertainment.

Camden Haven Courier - Camden Haven Chamber

Had it ever been stated what was the paper foster father was picking up for FGM, everyone seemed to say up thread FGM reading older local paper and foster father picking up one from the shop, what paper exactly did he pick up, has it ever been verified in the media?

was he picking up medication for the FGM or someone else

 

[Waverider]

And I'm trying to imagine police not then asking: "Why is this the first time that you have mentioned this?"

Also…

“Several contradictions reportedly set alarm bells ringing for the new investigation team when Detective Chief Inspector David Laidlaw took charge of the case.

Police hope revisiting the crucial first few minutes of the boy's disappearance could reveal crucial evidence that's been hiding in plain sight for seven years.”


William Tyrrell: Inside 96 minutes which could hold answer what REALLY happened to missing toddler | Daily Mail Online

 

[SouthAussie]

My point, to reiterate, is that we must be evidence-based. And based on the evidence, day 6 is the first time she mentioned a drive anywhere. If evidence emerges to the contrary, then I’ll adjust my beliefs accordingly. But what she may or may not have said to police in unreleased statements isn’t evidence.

Unreleased statements will be evidence, and will be contained in the police brief. The issue is that we do not have all of the evidence, so assumptions seem to be being taken as facts.

Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

 

[JBowie]

Also…

“Several contradictions reportedly set alarm bells ringing for the new investigation team when Detective Chief Inspector David Laidlaw took charge of the case.

Police hope revisiting the crucial first few minutes of the boy's disappearance could reveal crucial evidence that's been hiding in plain sight for seven years.”


William Tyrrell: Inside 96 minutes which could hold answer what REALLY happened to missing toddler | Daily Mail Online

When I look at some big cases in the USA and UK that took years to solve, it's often the situation that a fresh set of eyes finds exactly that.

If you are too close to something, you can miss stuff that has been staring you in the face.

(Like me and typos: If I don't find them in the first read through, it's odds-on I'll miss them in subsequent readings because to my mind's eye they have become part of the scenery - so to speak.)

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Had it ever been stated what was the paper foster father was picking up for FGM, everyone seemed to say up thread FGM reading older local paper and foster father picking up one from the shop, what paper exactly did he pick up, has it ever been verified in the media?

was he picking up medication for the FGM or someone else

I've never seen it stated anywhere what paper he was buying for FGM or who the medication was for.

 

[Waverider]

Unreleased statements will be evidence, and will be contained in the police brief. The issue is that we do not have all of the evidence, so assumptions seem to be being taken as facts.

Of course, everyone is entitled to their own opinions.

Attacking the straw man again…
I’m not making any assumptions, and that’s the point. Unknown potential evidence doesn’t refute actual evidence.

 

[JBowie]

If a person hadn't been back in months and didn't live there, even if two cars were parked on the road, how would that person be able to determine it to be unusual?

Good question, other than if maybe the habit of the locals was not to leave their cars parked on the side of the road, in which case anyone who did would be classed as a non-local.

And if there were cars there, and if it was truly unusual, wouldn't the people who actually lived there be more likely than less likely to have solid recollections thereof?

You'd think so, especially given it's a cul de sac, thus no through traffic.

trying to make sense of the senseless

As am I. Quite a few things don't appear to add up in this case. (That said, we don't have all the facts that the police have on file.)

 

[Deleted member 161976]

apparently it was Lauriton he went to - a slightly longer trip than to Lakewood ... imo

20 mins there, 40 min meeting, trip to pharmacy & buy the paper, 20 mins home = this is very tight imo for a 9.35 am arrival back at Benaroon Dr..... JMO

Do you have a link please showing it was Lauriton he went to? Also he arrived back at 1035 not 935.