Australia Australia - Pheobe Bishop, 17, failed to board a flight from Queensland, Bundaberg, 15 May 2025 *Arrests* #4

[BreakingNews]

Thank you so much for uploading this!

This video starts by turning onto Samuel's Rd, left onto Childer's Rd, right onto Airport Dr, brief entry/exit into the BMX turn off / dirt road (I didn't feel comfortable going any further given the circumstances), continuing down Airport Dr, and into the Bundaberg Airport.

I then drove through the drop off zone (no flights leaving at this time, so it was relatively empty), right through the roundabout onto Commercial St, round the roundabout back towards Airport Dr, a detour on Aviation Cres to give additional information about the area since it has been built up since the Street View images, and back towards Takalvan St.

Takalvan St turns into Childer's Rd at that intersection but it is the same road.

How far is Samuel Street from the airport, please?

 

[mishy66]

Just going back to this Daily Mail article.

And JW Gold Interview.
"Wood claimed this would have been the moment when CCTV footage picked up his car heading towards the Good Night Scrub National Park"

GNNP is no where near Bundy Airport


"Wood said he told Tanika Bromley to pull over so they could give Pheobe some space to cool off. After stepping away for a few minutes, he claimed he returned to find her and her large duffle bag gone"

We know PH had a black suitcase


Woods, "You wouldn't miss her carrying that thing, if you drove past her and saw her, you'd notice,' he said. Wood claims the pair then waited outside the small terminal for some time but did not go inside.

Pheobe Bishop's housemate James Wood breaks his silence

The flatmate of missing teenager Pheobe Bishop has revealed explosive new details about the her car ride to the airport on the day she disappeared.

www.dailymail.co.uk

The article actually show the dirt track entrance leading into Saltwater Creek area

 

[MathildaM]

Smiley’s (mother’s business) is 2 minutes from the house, they could have probably smelt the house from there.

Especially in the QLD heat!

 

[scepticalscotty]

I'm still totally confused as to why the police first searched in the area they did in Goodnight Scrub, why they then searched in exactly the correct place a couple of days later, why they allege that she was killed on Airport Drive and why they can so categorically state that TB and JW moved the body twice. I don't expect that the public should know the ins and outs but why, if they won't say why/how they searched where they did, will they state so clearly as an allegation rather than a suspicion what they believe? The only part that makes sense to me is that they presumably found forensic evidence in the first area whichj proved that poor Pheobe had been there and was no more Where do all the other 'facts' come from?

This is one of the best questions asked so far.
We can rule out a few scenarios based on this information alone.
1. The GNSNP original search site was not based of a geolocation. Therefore it stands to reason it was described to investigators.
2. PB was allegedly murdered near the Airport. CCTV captured the vehicle at the BMX club and it was stated that she was last seen alive prior to the BMX club.
3. No crime scene or point of interest was declared at the BMX club or the area identified as her homicide location on the QPS crime map. This means she never left the vehicle.

Let's add it up. Last seen alive prior to the BMX club- the BMX club entrance is off airport drive. CCTV at the intersection of Airport drive and Childers Road would have captured the vehicle. CCTV at the service station would have captured the vehicle. It's reasonable to assume these are the cameras that last caught her alive. Investigators know the vehicle entered the BMX club driveway. This means either a witness or further cameras. If cameras, they were not in focus enough to determine whether Phoebe was alive or not. The QPS crime map location of the homicide is positioned at the intersection of Johanna and commercial street. This is an area which almost be reached by the discreet dirt road via the BMX club with no CCTV footage and no eyewitness vantage points. Conversely, if the vehicle drove to this location via airport drive directly, it would have traversed a hospital and into an industrial area, buildings most likely possessing CCTV.

Now the missing piece of the puzzle.

Samuels road was declared a place of interest. They obviously stopped here for one reason or another. We know Phoebe was alive on the way to the airport so stopping at this location on the way there would not likely have warranted days worth of investigation. Stopping there on the way back, after PB was allegedly murdered WOULD warrant such. What exactly occured here is still unknown.

Now, here is where some deductive reasoning comes into practice...

The GNSNP location was not a geolocation. If it was. It would not be 9km inaccurate and police would not have mentioned identifying features. This means a person either witnessed the vehicle there or it was volunteered by the accused. Due to the silence maintained by TB and the innocence proclaimed by JW, it is unlikely they offered up the location. That leaves a witness. If a witness saw the vehicle and described the location to the police, it happened on either the day she was murdered or the two days after when she was relocated. As they found remains at the second location they searched, it again stands to reason that the witness identified the vehicle being there the two days after she was murdered. This means the initial location was not witnessed by the person identifying the vehicle in GNSNP.

Two scenarios exist now but only one that fits with confirmed events.

1) the first location is still unknown to police and could possibly be anywhere, including GNSNP. This is not likely as it would make it hard (not impossible, which is why it's still a possible scenario)to lay two counts of interference charges.

2) the first location was found, which would mean it was declared a POI and heavily investigated. This location was on Samuels road.

 

[thinker47]

This is one of the best questions asked so far.
We can rule out a few scenarios based on this information alone.
1. The GNSNP original search site was not based of a geolocation. Therefore it stands to reason it was described to investigators.
2. PB was allegedly murdered near the Airport. CCTV captured the vehicle at the BMX club and it was stated that she was last seen alive prior to the BMX club.
3. No crime scene or point of interest was declared at the BMX club or the area identified as her homicide location on the QPS crime map. This means she never left the vehicle.

Let's add it up. Last seen alive prior to the BMX club- the BMX club entrance is off airport drive. CCTV at the intersection of Airport drive and Childers Road would have captured the vehicle. CCTV at the service station would have captured the vehicle. It's reasonable to assume these are the cameras that last caught her alive. Investigators know the vehicle entered the BMX club driveway. This means either a witness or further cameras. If cameras, they were not in focus enough to determine whether Phoebe was alive or not. The QPS crime map location of the homicide is positioned at the intersection of Johanna and commercial street. This is an area which almost be reached by the discreet dirt road via the BMX club with no CCTV footage and no eyewitness vantage points. Conversely, if the vehicle drove to this location via airport drive directly, it would have traversed a hospital and into an industrial area, buildings most likely possessing CCTV.

Now the missing piece of the puzzle.

Samuels road was declared a place of interest. They obviously stopped here for one reason or another. We know Phoebe was alive on the way to the airport so stopping at this location on the way there would not likely have warranted days worth of investigation. Stopping there on the way back, after PB was allegedly murdered WOULD warrant such. What exactly occured here is still unknown.

Now, here is where some deductive reasoning comes into practice...

The GNSNP location was a geolocation. If it was. It would not be 9km inaccurate and police would not have mentioned identifying features. This means a person either witnessed the vehicle there or it was volunteered by the accused. Due to the silence maintained by TB and the innocence proclaimed by JW, it is unlikely they offered up the location. That leaves a witness. If a witness saw the vehicle and described the location to the police, it happened on either the day she was murdered or the two days after when she was relocated. As they found remains at the second location they searched, it again stands to reason that the witness identified the vehicle being there the two days after she was murdered. This means the initial location was not witnessed by the person identifying the vehicle in GNSNP.

Two scenarios exist now but only one that fits with confirmed events.

1) the first location is still unknown to police and could possibly be anywhere, including GNSNP. This is not likely as it would make it hard (not impossible, which is why it's still a possible scenario)to lay two counts of interference charges.

2) the first location was found, which would mean it was declared a POI and heavily investigated. This location was on Samuels road.

Remember the police officer saying, regarding the second location in GoodNight, that it 'mirrored' the first location... and that that was what they wanted. Which is why I've thought all along that it was searched for visually - therefore from a description. It can't be TB or JW because they were still maintaining their innocence so someone saw something that no-one is talking about. In GoodNight, not Samuels Road. I'm not disagreeing, just debating - and still totally confused!

EDITED TO ADD.... I see what you're saying - that the mirroring was not to match the location where they found evidence but to match the description of the location, which they had missed by 9km the first time. First location, red herring. Got you!

 

[mishy66]

I see what you're saying - that the mirroring was not to match the location where they found evidence but to match the description of the location, which they had missed by 9km the first time. First location, red herring. Got you!

Spot on

 

[alicrocodile]

<modsnip: Quoted post was removed>

if you know the area at all, it is literally not possible to be unaware of the condition of that house if you are that close.

 

[Absoluterubbish]

I wonder when PB was going to turn 18 - that could also be relevant to all of this. We know in January 2024 she was 16 as her sisters ad looking for a house for them both stated so.

 

[Absoluterubbish]

if you know the area at all, it is literally not possible to be unaware of the condition of that house if you are that close.

and being a town that small I imagine the condition of that house was spoken about throughout the town

 

[mishy66]

if you know the area at all, it is literally not possible to be unaware of the condition of that house if you are that close.

Yes I know.

 

[Eyespywithmylittleeye]

and being a town that small I imagine the condition of that house was spoken about throughout the town

Living in a tiny community myself 100% there would’ve been chatter amongst the town/neighbours etc.

 

[Aussieboy]

I'm still totally confused as to why the police first searched in the area they did in Goodnight Scrub, why they then searched in exactly the correct place a couple of days later, why they allege that she was killed on Airport Drive and why they can so categorically state that TB and JW moved the body twice. I don't expect that the public should know the ins and outs but why, if they won't say why/how they searched where they did, will they state so clearly as an allegation rather than a suspicion what they believe? The only part that makes sense to me is that they presumably found forensic evidence in the first area whichj proved that poor Pheobe had been there and was no more Where do all the other 'facts' come from?

You're basically tracked from the moment you leave your doorstep, whether you know it or not. Investigators would have formed a timeline and even though they may not know every minute of the day where you were, they can work out that it takes 1 hour to travel from A to B on average, and it's taken you 3 hours as seen on CCTV or reported by an eyewitness. It could be as simple as tracking the navigation system in the Hyundai, we don't know, and QPS may never reveal the answer.

For eg. and not saying it happened this exact way. They're going to bring you in for questioning and say we saw you at these locations, you're not in trouble, we believe you're innocent, but we just need to confirm why it had taken you so long to travel from A to B, can you remember if you had any stops, like a toilet break or a flat tyre. The interviewee could respond with I don't know (which is going to ring alarm bells) or they may have lied and said they took a toilet break in GN park at this point in the trip. LE have ways of finding things out.

 

[Absoluterubbish]

You're basically tracked from the moment you leave your doorstep, whether you know it or not. Investigators would have formed a timeline and even though they may not know every minute of the day where you were, they can work out that it takes 1 hour to travel from A to B on average, and it's taken you 3 hours as seen on CCTV or reported by an eyewitness. It could be as simple as tracking the navigation system in the Hyundai, we don't know, and QPS may never reveal the answer.

For eg. and not saying it happened this exact way. They're going to bring you in for questioning and say we saw you at these locations, you're not in trouble, we believe you're innocent, but we just need to confirm why it had taken you so long to travel from A to B, can you remember if you had any stops, like a toilet break or a flat tyre. The interviewee could respond with I don't know (which is going to ring alarm bells) or they may have lied and said they took a toilet break in GN park at this point in the trip. LE have ways of finding things out.

Yep and also checking what the accused searched on their phone etc. These two don't seem like rocket scientists so I have no doubt they made alot of mistakes along the way.

 

[Absoluterubbish]

Why does the media keep saying he's in a different jail to what he is actually in. Its public record that he is in Brisbane Correctional Facility

Gin Gin man James Wood faces court on weapons charges

Police allege they found a shortened firearm and ammunition during a search of a car and a home in Gin Gin in May.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Sillybilly]

This thread is closed for review and cleanup.

Check back later tonight.

 

[Knitty]

MOD NOTE: Please take a look at the second post on page one of this thread, and at the links below this post, for a reminder of the rules of this site and this thread. Many, many posts were removed for violations of TOS, some for random social media sources (covered at the social media rules link) and many for accusations and insinuations against a VICTIM in this case and for sleuthing family members in this case (covered in Etiquette & Information).

We appreciate your efforts in helping keep Websleuths rumor-free.

Thread is open.

 

[pukasonqo2]

At 18 years you are an adult in QLD and this would likely have entailed a reassessment if she was under a NDIS provider. Perhaps PB wanted to change and leave NDIS and be independent, I don’t believe you can claim Centrelink (welfare assistance towards rent for example) if receiving support for assisted independent living under the NDIS. PB wouldn’t have seen any $ under NSIS in her bank account (pocket). No NDIS at 18 years means PB would have received $ directly from the govt for ‘crossover’ services and not be dependent on an NDIS provider.

For more clarity as I waffled:
- NDIS payments would not have gone to Pheobe, straight to the service providers
- welfare payments would go directly to Pheobe to spend as she chose
- you can’t claim both for the same service, for example if an NDIS plan included supported independent living including rental assistance, wouldn’t pay rent assistance

You can get both NDIS and Centrelink but no double dipping.

It would depend on if Pheobe’s NDIS plan was self managed or if she had a plan manager, if she was self managed she would paid the service provider and then lodge the claim directly with the NDIS and be reimbursed, if she was plan managed she’d have to pay the service provider and then send the receipt to her plan manager for reimbursement

To be a service provider you’d have to register with the NDIS (I might be wrong here) and have an ABN, you are not supposed to use family or friends

 

[Snoop Sister]

At 17 can you not receive your own hypothetical payments?

In Canada you can if one becomes an emancipated adult.

 

[Marg944]

Pheobe Bishop’s alleged murderer James Wood fronts court on weapons charges – with new look​

“This time, the 34-year-old appeared via video-link in green and white prison garb, charged with multiple weapons offences dating back to May 19, 2025.

Wood’s appearance had also changed.
He appeared well-groomed and calm with his unruly hair and beard, previously dyed bleach blonde, returned to its natural ginger colouring.

Mr Wood faced charges of one count of possession of a shortened firearm in public and authority to possess explosives.

His lawyer, Lavonda Maloy, told the court an application for Legal Aid funding had been made on his behalf.

She asked the weapon charges be adjourned to a later date.

The charges will now return to court on August 11, coinciding with Wood’s second hearing on murder charges related to Pheobe’s disappearance.”

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/bundaberg/police-courts/pheobe-bishops-alleged-murderer-james-wood-fronts-court-on-weapons-charges-with-new-look/news-story/4a95159ca79f17d40404a675a1a5d60e

 

[Melbournian]

I wonder when PB was going to turn 18 - that could also be relevant to all of this. We know in January 2024 she was 16 as her sisters ad looking for a house for them both stated so.

If the sisters were that close , she may have discussed with her sis that she was possibly taking off to Perth for good. How sad that none of her family members took her to the airport to say goodbye , if there was a chance she was going long term .