Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sep 2014 - #68

[Serenanicole]

I think it’s been ascertained over past few days that the time the photo was taken was found to be correct
Back to the drawing board IMO

 

[Eloise]

It's interesting you raise this. I have listened to pretty much every interview with the FM and she has always come across to me as very unempathetic and making it all about her, and also as though she owned/owns William. I've had to turn interviews off and come back to them later I have found it so grating. I find her extremely unpleasant. I can see how she would have done things that demonstrate a lack of empathy.

It does not mean she is guilty of anything, of course.

Yes, this is basically why I've never warmed to her.

And yet, however,

Wasn't William riding his bike at 9am-ish? He doesn't look injured in the 9:37am photo. Looks happy and healthy to me.

imo

(Of course the answer to that is 'but was the photo really taken at 9:37am?' Yes, I think it was. I believe the DT found out that metadata result - as posted yesterday - that everyone else seems too busy or unable to find out from their own sources.)

This! While ever this photo remains as the proof that William was alive and well at 9.37am that morning, I just can't believe they did anything to William. It's just not possible to murder/be responsible for the death of a child and then dispose of the body and the evidence so well that when a swarm of cops and volunteers and SES are there within a couple of hours they find or see nothing at all that calls them into question. Do parental figures murder/kill by negligence children? Yes, sadly, with some regularity. But they generally give themselves hours and hours if not days or even months before reporting it. Not half an hour or so.

The only way its possible is if this photo is such a good fake that even the forensic examination of it was fooled, and I really doubt it. They're criminal masterminds if so.

Agree, he was only three! Same as climbing a tree, for goodness sake, what parent puts a three year old in a tree and expects him to climb? The FM clearly had no idea what the child’s limitations were. I believe that she was too old and too out of touch to be fostering a little exuberant boy of three.

Three year olds climb trees all the time. I work in early childhood education, and I had the fortune of working at a place with multiple climbable trees (there's a strong movement in early childhood education and care to encourage risky play and to acknowledge the dignity of risk). There is a difference between a risk and a hazard and kids climbing trees falls into the 'risk' category, and risk is actually really good for children's mental and physical development. There are plenty of three year olds more than happy to climb trees.

eta all IMO of course

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Yes he is.

I noticed his name in the list of online members a couple of weeks ago.

Is member @richieswan still around?

 

[centred]

IMO if we are talking about accidental scenarios , I can think of only 2 at the minute and going on approx. timelines , ...William fell from the balcony OR he was waiting for MFC to return as sister "also" said and he jumped out from the bushes "daddy tigering " Daddy didn't see him from the height of new vehicle , in MFC run through he says while he was searching initially he noted FFC approach the neighbor to help in the distance , he also said at that stage he saw no one else searching prior , which makes sense because according to him his wife asked him if WT was with him first . All IMO ..

Was the bike damaged ? Has anything been said in regards to this as I found this story strange about the "on purpose " garden crash and the not wanting to climb trees after putting him in a tree ? All word salads IMO

There has been a lot of comment re the bike crash , I was curious about the bike damage yes , however it was a tiny part of my comment and was meant to highlight my take on over sharing so much information and IMO I call word salads and was the first thing that set off my radar right from the beginning . The penchant to correct MFC timing when he spoke and adding lots of detail to his side of the story in interviews which i personally found strange had me suspicious . Perhaps if this style of speech and articulation did not continue I may have not questioned the stories for so long .
Hence 7 years later , I am still not convinced . IMO

 

[Awakening]

I think it’s been ascertained over past few days that the time the photo was taken was found to be correct
Back to the drawing board IMO

That was said in one msm article but I'm not sure if that's the media assuming or something else.

I've not seen anything official from the coroner or police.

Regardless, member richie put the time at about 9.15 and I was curious how he did this using shadows and light. I found it rather fascinating.

 

[Awakening]

Belrose park: 'Super creepy' man tries to lure young boy away at Sydney park | Daily Mail Online

How amazing are these kids?!

 

[Sillybilly]

ADMIN NOTE:

The bio parents were cleared early in the investigation and are not POIs/suspects. In accordance with our very basic Victim Friendly policy, please do not sleuth them or trash them.

Thank you.

 

[Akai]

Yes, this is basically why I've never warmed to her.

And yet, however,




This! While ever this photo remains as the proof that William was alive and well at 9.37am that morning, I just can't believe they did anything to William. It's just not possible to murder/be responsible for the death of a child and then dispose of the body and the evidence so well that when a swarm of cops and volunteers and SES are there within a couple of hours they find or see nothing at all that calls them into question. Do parental figures murder/kill by negligence children? Yes, sadly, with some regularity. But they generally give themselves hours and hours if not days or even months before reporting it. Not half an hour or so.

The only way its possible is if this photo is such a good fake that even the forensic examination of it was fooled, and I really doubt it. They're criminal masterminds if so.


<rsbm>

One of the things I come back to in this case is that, if the is confirmed at 9:37am, whatever happened to William it was either a criminal mastermind or insane "luck" (I don't like using the word here because it was insanely unlucky for William) that they got away with it, so the lack of likelihood of something based on the amount of time to do it, provided it can't be ruled out, doesn't really make something more or less likely than anything else. (There's my word salad contribution for the day.)

If the FPs story is believed then a predator just happened to be on the street at the exact time he ran around the house and in the space of a few minutes had gotten him into a car and driven off or grabbed him and wandered into the bush, and not one person heard or saw anything directly. This wasn't suburbia, but it wasn't the back of beyond, either. If the FPs story is not believed then something happened to him in the house and it was covered up in a relatively short space of time. In my view (and obviously everyone will differ on this), there's not a lot of difference in the unlikeliness. Neither are impossible.

I had the abduction theory as more likely until the information about the FM's drive came out at the inquest. It was partially the absence of this information in interviews - I had heard interviews about that morning and they were all so specific, right down to the order of the activities the kids participated in and what happened after he went missing - specific to the point that every minute was accounted for - and yet the drive was left out.

There are explanations for this that are not sinister. My first inclination was that she had forgotten due to the trauma, which would be completely normal. But then, why was she so certain about everything else? The other explanation is that she was told to leave this information out by police for some reason. But it wasn't like there was a gap in her stories that accounted for this - it actually didn't fit with the way the stories had been told in the interviews. She always said that she'd been running around looking and then got a text from FD saying "home in 5" and had calmed down a bit as a result. So I didn't think "oh well she clearly lied" but I did think her evidence was at that point unreliable.

It also made me realise that there was more time to do things than originally appeared. Maybe there wasn't more actual time, but she wasn't running around like a headless chook for it. The time wasn't used up by looking in cupboards and around the house, either; it was utilised by a drive down the road. For me that gave a very different perception of what was going on in that time. So at that point the theory that something happened at the FGM's house became as likely as the abduction theory to me.

The car actually helped form my theory on what happened if it was at the FGM's house: William did in fact disappear as stated. He ran around the house and into the car or something near it so hard he injured his head and was killed instantly. FM goes looking for him and finds him, and realises he is dead. She panics, because that's her whole world gone, not just losing William but losing his sister. She puts his body in the boot. There's no blood or anything like that because you can be killed by a knock to the head without bleeding. She goes back to "searching", her mind ticking over what to do. After a few minutes she comes up with going for a drive to "search" to dump the body, which she does. She figures if he's found then it will look like someone took him and killed him. She rationalises it in her mind that there was nothing she could do anyway, and it was better for his sister not to be taken away from them. Nobody else has any awareness of this, hence their stories are consistent with the official story about the disappearance. It could all have happened, without a trace, in 20 minutes.

 

[Lemony]

That was said in one msm article but I'm not sure if that's the media assuming or something else.

I've not seen anything official from the coroner or police.

Regardless, member richie put the time at about 9.15 and I was curious how he did this using shadows and light. I found it rather fascinating.

Journalist Mark Morri from the DT was the first to break the news about a new POI on Sept 7th last year. IMO he must’ve had a pretty good source within NSWPol to have obtained that information. The latest article was written by Janet Fyfe Yeomans, chief reporter at the DT, both her and Mark Morri have co-written pieces together about William in the past. Info in the DT regarding the photo time is most likely correct IMO, although it would be good to have it confirmed officially.

 

[Couldbe]

MFC said during the first week of the Inquest that began on 25 March, 2019:

Tyrrell's foster father searched everywhere
“The man said he drove to nearby Lakewood about 9am for a strong internet connection for a conference call and planned to be home around 10.30am.
He sent a text to his wife about that time to say he'd be home in five minutes.”

That was said in one msm article but I'm not sure if that's the media assuming or something else.

I've not seen anything official from the coroner or police.

Regardless, member richie put the time at about 9.15 and I was curious how he did this using shadows and light. I found it rather fascinating.

On the face of it the time doesn't fit. MFC's departure time is very unclear but the latest that has been posited is that his phone left the house at 9:30; but William was photographed alive at 9:37.

MFC told the Inquest that he drove to nearby Lakewood at about 9am;
JLZ posted that MFC's phone left house at 9:30;William was photographed alive at 9:37;
Awakening posted that richie put time of photograph at about 9.15 (MFC possibly still there).

JMO ..... using 'about' to state a time-frame seems to be loose, especially when time could well be of the essence in this investigation: e.g. photo at 9.15 / MFC's phone would not then have departed the house..... meaning that there would then be no further proof that William would necessarily be still there (he could have departed the house with whoever was in possession of MFC's phone.
Of course, FFC has said many times that William was still there up until 10:30.

 

[sleepinoz]

MFC said during the first week of the Inquest that began on 25 March, 2019:

Tyrrell's foster father searched everywhere
“The man said he drove to nearby Lakewood about 9am for a strong internet connection for a conference call and planned to be home around 10.30am.
He sent a text to his wife about that time to say he'd be home in five minutes.”




MFC told the Inquest that he drove to nearby Lakewood at about 9am;
JLZ posted that MFC's phone left house at 9:30;William was photographed alive at 9:37;
Awakening posted that richie put time of photograph at about 9.15 (MFC possibly still there).

JMO ..... using 'about' to state a time-frame seems to be loose, especially when time could well be of the essence in this investigation: e.g. photo at 9.15 / MFC's phone would not then have departed the house..... meaning that there would then be no further proof that William would necessarily be still there (he could have departed the house with whoever was in possession of MFC's phone.
Of course, FFC has said many times that William was still there up until 10:30.

Re the MFC's phone leaving the house at 9:30 - I've never read that, does "anyone" have a link please.

 

[JLZ]

Re the MFC's phone leaving the house at 9:30 - I've never read that, does "anyone" have a link please.

I have that second-hand: I'm told it's in one of the books, Caroline Overington's I believe.

 

[sleepinoz]

Re the MFC's phone leaving the house at 9:30 - I've never read that, does "anyone" have a link please.

Don't worry I found it.

 

[Akai]

Re the MFC's phone leaving the house at 9:30 - I've never read that, does "anyone" have a link please.

https://www.news.com.au/national/ns...d/news-story/6983c0a44392f8599514e4b5c8a56f04

Apparently his mobile phone records showed this. I presume they mean tower data, or did he text someone as he was leaving or even try to make a call even though apparently they couldn't there.

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

Just as a side note- if the FMFC planned to go to his meeting and be back at 10:30, I’m not sure why there was a need to text to the FFFC “I’ll be back in 5”. By the time you wrote, sent and FM received and read it you’d almost be home anyway.

 

[Akai]

Just as a side note- if the FMFC planned to go to his meeting and be back at 10:30, I’m not sure why there was a need to text to the FFFC “I’ll be back in 5”. By the time you wrote, sent and FM received and read it you’d almost be home anyway.

So apparently, according to the FM & FF, this was a standard thing so the kids could be ready to greet him because that was exciting for them.

 

[Akai]

This information, about the mobile phone records, only appears to have emerged in November 2021. That's when the articles that contain the information are from. I can't find anything earlier. Surely, surely, they knew this from very early on and it was simply never commented upon in the media because it didn't seem relevant until all the recent charges and FM becoming a POI?

9:30am is damn close to 9:37am.

 

[sleepinoz]

I have that second-hand: I'm told it's in one of the books, Caroline Overington's I believe.

No it's not in CO's book, it's another one off article from News.com.au linked above.

CO's book states the following page 12:

 

[Awakening]

Journalist Mark Morri from the DT was the first to break the news about a new POI on Sept 7th last year. IMO he must’ve had a pretty good source within NSWPol to have obtained that information. The latest article was written by Janet Fyfe Yeomans, chief reporter at the DT, both her and Mark Morri have co-written pieces together about William in the past. Info in the DT regarding the photo time is most likely correct IMO, although it would be good to have it confirmed officially.

It would be good to have it officially confirmed.

Because 9.37 to 10.30 (FF arrival) is 53 minutes which seems like not very much time to hide a body and destroy evidence by yourself. It's not impossible but seems pretty remote IMO.

 

[sleepinoz]

https://www.news.com.au/national/ns...d/news-story/6983c0a44392f8599514e4b5c8a56f04

Apparently his mobile phone records showed this. I presume they mean tower data, or did he text someone as he was leaving or even try to make a call even though apparently they couldn't there.

This article is the only article that states this, and the article doesn't carry a Jurno's name. IMO it was written by a staffer not a known Jurno.

With additional info from CO's book and other articles, I will choose not to believe this.