Australia Australia - William Tyrrell Disappeared While Playing in Yard - Kendall (NSW) - #74

[sleepinoz]

If you would be so kind as to add the quote from the Newcastle Herald article that backs up your argument, (as it is behind a paywall for me) I will consider what you are saying.

The following quote from the campaign website I believe could open to being misunderstood, ambiguous and no endorsement whatsoever from NSW police, Crimestoppers or the AFP. "With the support of the Daniel Morcombe Foundation, and working in collaboration with the NSW Police Force and with the support of the Australian Federal Police and Crime Stoppers, William’s family hope to generate information to assist the investigation into William’s abduction and bring him home."

I actually did add a quote from the Newcastle Herald - it wasn't behind a paywall for me (not sure why you can't see it).

Just because:

The quote said "It is the latest step in a campaign led by child protection advocate Bravehearts and NSW Police."

 

[sleepinoz]

Not even profiting, just running a campaign when they are a POI.

Just to add, they weren't (well FM wasn't) a POI when the campaign begun, and at least 7? years after that.

What sense would it make for a POI to even try and put together a campaign, among other things, to find a missing child if they were involved? I doubt it was for money, there would be no control, for a person to access any money with a board of people assisting. IMO

 

[sleepinoz]

Because the campaign is being run for the benefit of the people WT went missing from. It is to give the appearance that they have been cleared, it is to give the appearance that child protection agencies or honourable people like the Morecombes and the NSW police and the AFP and Crimestoppers are all supporting them and it also lets you know in the campaign, according to them, WT was abducted on 12/9/2014 by someone bad, it is about them being able to take control of the narrative when it really wasn't appropriate on a number of levels for them to do so. IMO

Can you please advise what benefit they are receiving from the campaign?

 

[sleepinoz]

Well it is in quotation marks. Who said it?

The Newcastle Herald - I put it in quotation marks as I quoted it from the article.

 

[SouthAussie]

I'm not SA, but I'm responding - hope you don't mind.

There is a little thing called defamation - if anything in these 'communications' is degrading to the people mentioned - then it becomes a law suite. IMO

Yes. There are several ways this Morcombe matter can play into things.

Possible defamation
Possible harassment
A defence lawyer for the FM could likely use this to show how much damage the police announcements have done to their client
A defence lawyer for any other accused person could likely use this to show that the court of (some) public opinion thinks someone else is liable (reasonable doubt).

Bruce Morcombe’s comment was that he is aware the air is different. Not that he believes in the guilt or innocence.
It would be smart for him to handball the matter to a legal associate and get this on an official record.

imo

 

[iiiii's]

Just to add, they weren't (well FM wasn't) a POI when the campaign begun, and at least 7? years after that.

What sense would it make for a POI to even try and put together a campaign, among other things, to find a missing child if they were involved? I doubt it was for money, there would be no control, for a person to access any money with a board of people assisting. IMO

The FP's and the FGM may have been cleared publicly by the launch of the campaign in 2015, but we know that when GJ called the FP's in to be interviewed in 2016? they were obviously not cleared in a number of the SFR's minds, not even last year when their suspicions were more publicly displayed nor even a couple of weeks ago in a court case and many following the case have had a nagging suspicion about the FFFC's involvement since 2014. IMO

 

[sleepinoz]

The FP's and the FGM may have been cleared publicly by the launch of the campaign in 2015, but we know that when GJ called the FP's in to be interviewed in 2016? they were obviously not cleared in a number of the SFR's minds, not even last year when their suspicions were more publicly displayed nor even a couple of weeks ago in a court case and many following the case have had a nagging suspicion about the FFFC's involvement since 2014. IMO

Which is a different conversation to what I was responding to.

 

[bearbear]

Can you please advise what benefit they are receiving from the campaign?

could it be the benefit of controlling the narrative?

 

[SouthAussie]

The FP's and the FGM may have been cleared publicly by the launch of the campaign in 2015, but we know that when GJ called the FP's in to be interviewed in 2016? they were obviously not cleared in a number of the SFR's minds, not even last year when their suspicions were more publicly displayed nor even a couple of weeks ago in a court case and many following the case have had a nagging suspicion about the FFFC's involvement since 2014. IMO

That just doesn’t matter as far as the missing persons website is concerned.

What if William was abducted and is alive somewhere. What if he stumbled on the description of himself on the website when he is older and realised that was him.

To discredit a missing persons website is foolish. imo
It is doing no harm. And it still could aid in finding William.
It seems to be just nastiness done by so-far-unnamed people who don’t understand or don’t want to understand the potential ramifications.

imo

 

[iiiii's]

That just doesn’t matter as far as the missing persons website is concerned.

What if William was abducted and is alive somewhere. What if he stumbled on the description of himself on the website when he is older and realised that was him.

To discredit a missing persons website is foolish. imo
It is doing no harm. And it still could aid in finding William.
It seems to be just nastiness done by so-far-unnamed people who don’t understand or don’t want to understand the potential ramifications.

imo

I think I have supplied very valid reasons for why this particular campaign could be harmful and should not have been run, the least of which could have been public control of the narrative by a POI in William's disappearance?!?!?

bbm

 

[Couldbe]

JMO – The reason to have the Daniel Morcombe Foundation connection would only be required for directing donations.

Donations
"Donations

Everyone in William’s family loves him and cares about him and is desperate to find him and bring him home. Thank you to everyone who has supported the search for William and for your generous donations to the Where’s William? Campaign to increase awareness of William and remind people that he is still missing. Your donations have contributed toward the production and management of variety of communication resources including graphic design, website hosting, posters and so on.
Our heartfelt thanks to the Daniel Morcombe Foundation and to everyone who has supported the campaign in the search for William. Your support has meant a great deal to us all."

Edited to include link to Where's William website.

 

[SouthAussie]

I think I have supplied very valid reasons for why this particular campaign could be harmful and should not have been run, the least of which could have been public control of the narrative by a POI in William's disappearance?!?!?

bbm

But that just doesn’t apply any more. There’s no ‘controlling the narrative’ any more. (Not that I agree they were trying to do that in any nefarious way.)

FM is splashed in her slippered feet all over the DM whenever she sneezes. There are legions of people who know their identity. They have been accused of multiple things in a most public way.

I think it is absurd to drag the missing persons website (and the Morcombes) into this at this late juncture. But, hey, if the unnamed persons want to expose their own brand of nasty and get themselves involved in the legalities, let the chips fall where they may. I think it is foolish and unnecessary to harm the essential missing persons website. It still may assist in finding William.

imo

 

[SouthAussie]

JMO – The reason to have the Daniel Morcombe Foundation connection would only be required for directing donations.

Donations
"Donations

Everyone in William’s family loves him and cares about him and is desperate to find him and bring him home. Thank you to everyone who has supported the search for William and for your generous donations to the Where’s William? Campaign to increase awareness of William and remind people that he is still missing. Your donations have contributed toward the production and management of variety of communication resources including graphic design, website hosting, posters and so on.
Our heartfelt thanks to the Daniel Morcombe Foundation and to everyone who has supported the campaign in the search for William. Your support has meant a great deal to us all."

Edited to include link to Where's William website.

And due to this silliness, poor Bruce felt he had to explain that the DMF was still holding $1500 of the Where’s William donations after 2 years. To try to avert any financial shade being thrown at the Morcombes.

I think it is up to the Morcombes who they support and when. They are not stupid people. It is not up to people who won’t even release their own names to try to manipulate them.

ETA: imo

 

[Couldbe]

And due to this silliness, poor Bruce felt he had to explain that the DMF was still holding $1500 of the Where’s William donations after 2 years. To try to avert any financial shade being thrown at the Morcombes.

I think it is up to the Morcombes who they support and when. They are not stupid people. It is not up to people who won’t even release their own names to try to manipulate them.

ETA: imo

JMO - Transparency gains/retains trust ... especially if donations can still be made via the Where's William website.

 

[deugirtni]

And due to this silliness, poor Bruce felt he had to explain that the DMF was still holding $1500 of the Where’s William donations after 2 years. To try to avert any financial shade being thrown at the Morcombes.

I think it is up to the Morcombes who they support and when. They are not stupid people. It is not up to people who won’t even release their own names to try to manipulate them.

ETA: imo

It is indeed up to the Morcombes who they support and when, and as noted, they are not stupid people. The Morcombe Foundation seems to have been quoted in that news article saying,

'I am aware our name and logo are still appearing on the "Where's William" website ... and we are endeavouring to get these removed,' the email read.

'However, as the Foundation does not own these platforms we do not have any direct access and are reliant on other parties to action our requests.'

Mr Morcombe said the DMF had held monies on behalf of Where's William in the past and still had $1500 'sitting on our books for two years'.

'We have made contact over the last couple of months,' he said."

I am interpreting the quoted parts, which appear to have come directly from the Morcombe Founcation, as meaning the Morcombe Foundation has been, over the last couple of months, asking the Where's William? Campaign to remove the Morcombe Foundation's name and logo from its website, but that they have no direct access to do it themselves and so must rely on 'other parties' to do so, which it seems obvious has not yet been done, as they are still appearing on the website as of right now (About the Where’s William? Campaign). If that is the case, then why shouldn't it be brought to light, and why is it 'silliness'? It seems 'the people who won't even release their own names' are simply the general public/supporters of the Morcombe Foundation? And where is it said these people 'won't' release their own names - perhaps there are many, too many to list, and/or the Daily Mail doesn't feel the list of individual names is the important piece in this story? And where is it said these unnamed people are 'trying to manipulate' - I am reading they simply asked a question?

"...Supporters of the Morcombe Foundation questioned the link after a senior detective told court William's foster mother 'knows where the missing toddler's body is' during her court hearing for the charge of lying to the NSW Crime Commission."

Daniel Morecombe's parents cut ties with William Tyrrell charity

 

[SouthAussie]

It is indeed up to the Morcombes who they support and when, and as noted, they are not stupid people. The Morcombe Foundation seems to have been quoted in that news article saying,

'I am aware our name and logo are still appearing on the "Where's William" website ... and we are endeavouring to get these removed,' the email read.

'However, as the Foundation does not own these platforms we do not have any direct access and are reliant on other parties to action our requests.'

Mr Morcombe said the DMF had held monies on behalf of Where's William in the past and still had $1500 'sitting on our books for two years'.

'We have made contact over the last couple of months,' he said."

I am interpreting the quoted parts, which appear to have come directly from the Morcombe Founcation, as meaning the Morcombe Foundation has been, over the last couple of months, asking the Where's William? Campaign to remove the Morcombe Foundation's name and logo from its website, but that they have no direct access to do it themselves and so must rely on 'other parties' to do so, which it seems obvious has not yet been done, as they are still appearing on the website as of right now (About the Where’s William? Campaign). If that is the case, then why shouldn't it be brought to light, and why is it 'silliness'? It seems 'the people who won't even release their own names' are simply the general public/supporters of the Morcombe Foundation? And where is it said these people 'won't' release their own names - perhaps there are many, too many to list, and/or the Daily Mail doesn't feel the list of individual names is the important piece in this story? And where is it said these unnamed people are 'trying to manipulate' - I am reading they simply asked a question?

"...Supporters of the Morcombe Foundation questioned the link after a senior detective told court William's foster mother 'knows where the missing toddler's body is' during her court hearing for the charge of lying to the NSW Crime Commission."

Daniel Morecombe's parents cut ties with William Tyrrell charity

Obviously you are entitled to interpret how you want. But I think the contact was likely more about what did they want done with the $1500.

It sickens me that these unnamed people alluded to being supporters of DMF to manipulate. And we hear so much about ‘narratives’. Pot, kettle.

imo

 

[iiiii's]

Obviously you are entitled to interpret how you want. But I think the contact was likely more about what did they want done with the $1500.

It sickens me that these unnamed people alluded to being supporters of DMF to manipulate. And we hear so much about ‘narratives’. Pot, kettle.

imo

Many have deep admiration and respect for DM and BM and would hate for them and their hard work to be potentially compromised or taken advantage of. It needs to be acknowledged that WT's "official campaign" has always been problematic. My own opinion is that government departments responsible for WT and for finding him, have always known that and ignored the issues. IMO

 

[SouthAussie]

Many have deep admiration and respect for DM and BM and would hate for them and their hard work to be potentially compromised or taken advantage of. It needs to be acknowledged that WT's "official campaign" has always been problematic. My own opinion is that government departments responsible for WT and for finding him, have always known that and ignored the issues. IMO

Yes, I have great respect for the Morcombes.
It is baffling to me that others cannot see when the line has been crossed. As if the Morcombes can’t be trusted to do what THEY feel is the right thing.

The two organisations have always worked at arms length. People should look up what arms length means in business (not directed at you) then they would understand that nothing is compromised.

Once these unnamed people are named, maybe then we might see a clearer picture of their intent. Which I suspect is to discredit a missing persons website.

 

[iiiii's]

Yes, I have great respect for the Morcombes.
It is baffling to me that others cannot see when the line has been crossed. As if the Morcombes can’t be trusted to do what THEY feel is the right thing.

The two organisations have always worked at arms length. People should look up what arms length means in business (not directed at you) then they would understand that nothing is compromised.

Once these unnamed people are named, maybe then we might see a clearer picture of their intent. Which I suspect is to discredit a missing persons website.

It could be that the M's are quite aware that their brand may be compromised and believe this is the best way to distance themselves and have their logo et. removed from WT's site. Their intellectual property may well be compromised. Why would anyone want to discredit a missing persons website? What possible issues could be at play to do so. I imagine that everyone who knows that WT is missing, wants a website dedicated to that cause, but not one run by a PR company that was taken on by the former carers, one of which is a POI. It's always been inappropriate. It's a living insult to is bio family. It's baffling to me as well that others cannot see when the line has been crossed.

moo

 

[iiiii's]

There is already one deathbed confession.

If you're talking about RP, I'd say death bed police harrassment more like. His main gripe was he wanted the police to leave him alone while he was dying. Apparently the police had visited him several times. Some say he was cogent at the end and others say he wasn't. He didn't name anyone to the witnesses who came to the inquest, he just nodded his head when someone suggested WT as the little boy. He didn't name the mate either and we also have in other witness evidence that FA had given a woman and her son a lift north and he was angry as he hadn't been paid, could have been RP was the driver on that occassion. MOO