IMO the bio's have mouth pieces: These two journos , CO & Candice Sutton & lets not forget AS, just to name a few.
BM was (eventually) validated in the national press (four years later). However--also true--her positive coverage paled in comparison to the foster's, even though her potential complicity--based on evidence--required far less scrutiny unlike that of the foster's.
Caroline Overington wasn't any more a mouthpiece for the bios than the fosters (she is hardly critical of the fosters, especially compared to these threads). She was one of the few objective figures in this whole mess. That makes her someone that told the story of people--including Bill Spedding--who had alibis and lacked access to resources and physical addresses of their "perceived targets" (if one was looking at the bios as suspects).
Something that Lia Harris failed to do in her initial portrayal of them. Harris actively marginalised the bios by excluding them as a mourning party one year after WT's disappearance. In the
Little Boy Lost podcast, she literally rated the city of Kendall's relationship to WT as more significant than the bio's. How do we know this? In all of her three parts, one is mentioned, and the other is 100% absent in her coverage. This was the very first podcast Harris did and she completely left out the bios, as if they were an afterthought in all of this. Were the fosters ever an afterthought?
In Harris'
Where's William Tyrrell?, she picked and chose out of what was allowed to be covered, yet how much time she would devote to those things in her podcast was absolutely 100% her choice. That included illegal recordings of a senile recent widower talking to himself in an incriminating, intimate way about personal demons which had nothing to do with WT (and therefore NONE of our business), but, instead, was paraded around for all of Harris' listeners to hear. How embarrassing for him. I've worked with dementia patients in the past, and I shudder to think what could possibly happen if a member of LE took advantage of someone so vulnerable in the pursuit of a (misguided) agenda, regardless of how "horrible" that person is. JMO.
Harris didn't apply such attention to the multiple levels of incredulity of FFC's twin cars, this "paedophile ring" which required a neighbour to call someone up the night the fosters arrived, or the conspicuous absence of the riding school (all publicly known by the time her podcast went into production). She accepted all of that at face value and, as a journalist, failed to question these things which created whitewashed coverage beyond what anyone else received connected to this case.
This was extra service provided to favour narratives the fosters wanted to push to deflect inconsistencies related to them. There were no inconsistencies to the bios. They had alibis and had to watch most of this on TV like the rest of us, unlike the fosters who had an inside connection with Gary Jubelin.
Candace Sutton has 1,000 Twitter followers. That doesn't compare to weekly national news show
60 Minutes and Chris Smith as your advocates.
The bios DID NOT have the same level of access to media that the fosters did, and they didn't even have anything to hide.
