Australia Australia - William Tyrrell Disappeared While Playing in Yard - Kendall (NSW) - #75

[bearbear]

thanks bear!x
Yes I was pretty sure there are a few markers they have to confirm deceased DNA.
This is clearly one of them

After so many years before the car was tested can only suspect any source would be deteriorated at best.
But this is what I think they have got.
It just fits with the narrative and charges under consideration IMO.

also because the body shuts down there may have been evidence of other body fluids, saliva, urine etc

 

[k-mac]

also because the body shuts down there may have been evidence of other body fluids, saliva, urine etc

yes totally!
could be anything to fall under the DNA spectrum not specifically to blood.

 

[Green beans]

also because the body shuts down there may have been evidence of other body fluids, saliva, urine etc

Or a few hairs..

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/231212900_Taphonomy_of_Hair_-_A_Study_of_Postmortem_Root_Banding

forensics would be able to determine how long a person had been deceased by a found hair.

 

[Awakening]

Blood, hairs, dna in the boot of FGM’s car is an interesting perspective.

Even if he had been in FGM’s car it would most likely be before this trip as they’d only just got there.

It would also be unusual for it to be found in the boot because why would a child be in the boot?

But my understanding is the car was forensically tested soon after his disappearance so I’d expect something would have been picked up then.

Unless forensic technology has improved since then? Anybody know?

 

[iiiii's]

Taking into consideration the charges NSW police want to make, they would have to have evidence somehow of WT's death, I am assuming some kind of materials from him that can only be found when someone is deceased. Even if hair and skin cells, blood etc were found in the FGM's boot, there can be other reasons why that material is there through transference. If death evidence is in the car then the charges are reasonable I think. MOO

They can tell if blood is from a deceased person.
Could be iffy though if he was removed quickly.

Could be why LE are seeking support from the DPP.
I think the DNA is there but it might not be an excellent sample.

 

[Burtrito]

With the way this investigation has been going I don’t think any secrets are left unleaked. I would like to believe there’s significant evidence of some kind but seriously doubt nsw police force ability to hold any cards close enough to their chests that the public wouldn’t already know somehow. I hope I’m wrong.
MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

I might have missed it but was she left in care after this assault was recorded ? We do know they stalked her re school etc ..do we know she was not removed either by school reporting as well ?

Yes, she remained in her foster home (of about 11 years) for 7 months after the alleged assault.

We don't know who eventually reported to FACS. Just that the police (Lonergan) said they didn't report because they were actively monitoring. As per my previous link.

 

[Sillybilly]

yes, but as its paywalled the whole article cant be posted here

When an article is paywalled, NOTHING can be direct quoted from it.

from: The Rules: Copyright Rules = Copyright Law

Members may link to a paywalled article so that others who wish to pay for the article can read it. However, even if they have paid for it, members can not copy/paste, quote directly, or disseminate any content within the article. It is not only a violation of Websleuths TOS (aka The Rules), it is a violation of copyright law.

Members may very briefly paraphrase (in their own words) what the article is about or they can copy the Google hit summary to give an idea of what the article contains in the event people wish to pay for the article.

 

[LolaAngelina]

I don't know about that.
Been looking for something online to support either or but it's not black and white to find.

But anyhow, I suspect there is blood DNA belonging to William in grandma's boot cavity.
Even a drop..... would be a pretty ominous find considering william vanished under her watch.

my strong humble personal opinion

A dead person doesn’t bleed though so the blood is obviously always from someone when they were alive. Again a drop would be very easy to excuse away and certainly not enough for an arrest let alone a conviction. Evidence that there was a large amount that someone could not possibly survive losing would be a different story

 

[LolaAngelina]

What happens to blood after death?


After death the blood generally clots slowly and remains clotted for several days. In some cases, however, fibrin and fibrinogen disappears from blood in a comparatively short time and the blood is found to be fluid and incoagulable soon after death.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1748-1716.1953.tb00942.x#:~:text=After%20death%20the%20blood%20generally,and%20incoagulable%20soon%20after%20death.

Yes that’s what happens to blood IN the body after death. We are talking about the possibility of drops of Williams in the car. Only alive people bleed, so FM could simply say oh he cut his knee etc.

 

[LolaAngelina]

also because the body shuts down there may have been evidence of other body fluids, saliva, urine etc

Saliva and Urine do not mean someone is dead. Bodily fluids which indicate decomposition takes time. According to the police theory he was very quickly put in the car and then immediately dumped.

 

[SouthAussie]

Yes that’s what happens to blood IN the body after death. We are talking about the possibility of drops of Williams in the car. Only alive people bleed, so FM could simply say oh he cut his knee etc.

I have scoured and cannot find any difference in found blood spots/trace blood that identifies that a missing person is deceased.

There are blood spatter patterns that indicate a person suffered massive violence.
There are huge amounts of blood that indicate that a person has exsanguinated.

The article that bear posted (from 1952) clearly says that fibrinolytic activity can happen in a deceased person and has been found in alive people as well. So, no definitive indication there either.

So, if blood dripped/smeared from somewhere, I don't think they can tell if the subject was alive or deceased when the blood dripped/smeared.

imo

 

[JLZ]

Yes that’s what happens to blood IN the body after death. We are talking about the possibility of drops of Williams in the car. Only alive people bleed, so FM could simply say oh he cut his knee etc.

BBM. It depends where the blood is found. Blood in the cabin of the foster family car would be easy to explain away with a cut to the knee. Blood in the boot of FGM's car--what would he have been doing in the boot in the first place?

 

[SouthAussie]

BBM. It depends where the blood is found. Blood in the cabin of the foster family car would be easy to explain away with a cut to the knee. Blood in the boot of FGM's car--what would he have been doing in the boot in the first place?

A good defence lawyer would say "blood transfer".
As in, someone who tended a cut knee then placed something (else) in the boot and transferred some of the cut-knee blood.

 

[LolaAngelina]

BBM. It depends where the blood is found. Blood in the cabin of the foster family car would be easy to explain away with a cut to the knee. Blood in the boot of FGM's car--what would he have been doing in the boot in the first place?

Yes it would be odd for sure. It’s easily explained away “oh he must have climbed in there”. Police can’t prove he didn’t and again such a small amount on its own doesn’t mean much

 

[LolaAngelina]

I have scoured and cannot find any difference in found blood spots/trace blood that identifies that a missing person is deceased.

There are blood spatter patterns that indicate a person suffered massive violence.
There are huge amounts of blood that indicate that a person has exsanguinated.

The article that bear posted (from 1952) clearly says that fibrinolytic activity can happen in a deceased person and has been found in alive people as well. So, no definitive indication there either.

So, if blood dripped/smeared from somewhere, I don't think they can tell if the subject was alive or deceased when the blood dripped/smeared.

imo

BBM Yes the blood obviously leaves the body when the person is alive. If someone is killed in a home and blood is left there and then the person puts them in a car and blood transfers, there is no test that can say the blood in the home is from an alive person and the blood in the car is from a dead person.

 

[JLZ]

Yes it would be odd for sure. It’s easily explained away “oh he must have climbed in there”. Police can’t prove he didn’t and again such a small amount on its own doesn’t mean much

No, a three-year-old child can't open a car boot to climb in, leaving aside the question of whether it automatically locked. And if he did manage to get in without anyone noticing, I am even more sure he couldn't reach to close the boot after exiting.

 

[JLZ]

Saliva and Urine do not mean someone is dead. Bodily fluids which indicate decomposition takes time. According to the police theory he was very quickly put in the car and then immediately dumped.

The point is that dead bodies leak. There may be characteristic combinations of leaked fluids that suggest a fresh corpse.

 

[SouthAussie]

No, a three-year-old child can't open a car boot to climb in, leaving aside the question of whether it automatically locked. And if he did manage to get in without anyone noticing, I am even more sure he couldn't reach to close the boot after exiting.

It is hard to believe that the original forensic testing of the car - which happened within a couple of days after William disappeared - did not reveal forensic evidence. And 7 years later, it did. Possible, but not probable. imo

Hans Rupp sounded pretty confident that he had good reason to rule out the FP in this matter (in the interview that was posted way back when, I think by Lemony, IIRC).

 

[JLZ]

It is hard to believe that the original forensic testing of the car - which happened within a couple of days after William disappeared - did not reveal forensic evidence. And 7 years later, it did. Possible, but not probable. imo

Hans Rupp sounded pretty confident that he had good reason to rule out the FP in this matter (in the interview that was posted way back when, I think by Lemony).

Someone will remember this argument in a few months and be positive that blood was found in FGM's car because we talked about how it got there.