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

[Marg944]

Looks like the suppression orders for naming little William's former foster carers has been removed. We had discussed this here earlier, thinking that this would be the case, as they are no longer foster carers. The Court case listing now names his former foster carer in full.

 

[katydid23]

Potentially as well yes. I’m leaning towards LE purposely to put pressure on certain people. In light of BS suing NSW police for wrongful accusations they would be very cautious but must have a high degree of confidence if they did so anyway.

IMO I think they have more info than they’re letting on but need more confirmation to make charges stick.

I am not sure it is true that they have a lot more info on the POI's already.

That was not the case with previous POI's that they publicly accused and pressured. They were bluffing in those previous cases. So why would I think this was any different?

 

[sleepinoz]

Looks like the suppression orders for naming little William's former foster carers has been removed. We had discussed this here earlier, thinking that this would be the case, as they are no longer foster carers. The Court case listing now names his former foster carer in full.

I don't think they have been lifted. They have been publicly named in previous court listings, and then removed when they realise that the Coroners NPO's are still in effect. IMO

 

[Marg944]

Looks like the suppression orders for naming little William's former foster carers has been removed. We had discussed this here earlier, thinking that this would be the case, as they are no longer foster carers. The Court case listing now names his former foster carer in full.

I think previously the Court may have used their initials, but never their names in full.....

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

I am not sure it is true that they have a lot more info on the POI's already.

That was not the case with previous POI's that they publicly accused and pressured. They were bluffing in those previous cases. So why would I think this was any different?

Because the last POI is suing them. I’m sure they wouldn’t make the same mistake twice

 

[sleepinoz]

I think previously the Court may have used their initials, but never their names in full.....

Their full names were used, I can't show you a copy though as it would be against the Coroners NPO's and WS's rules. IMO

 

[katydid23]

Because the last POI is suing them. I’m sure they wouldn’t make the same mistake twice

Not really because there are two POI's suing them, IIRC. So evidently they did make the same mistake twice.

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

Not really because there are two POI's suing them, IIRC. So evidently they did make the same mistake twice.

Bit those 2 people had the same head investigator who you could argue went way too hard without the proper information to pin on them.
The police minister and senior officials would not authorise the current proceedings unless there was just cause and reasons imo. Being a govt department negative public outcry’s, such as that with BS attracts knee jerk reactions that they would not want again. Unless the current LE have lobbied hard, or done it regardless, which I find hard to believe imo

 

[Underbelly]

Not really because there are two POI's suing them, IIRC. So evidently they did make the same mistake twice.

And for each of the publicly known POI's there have most likely been a dozen others who may have been pressured to a lesser extent.

Given the only people we (and apparently police) know of that were there when William disappeared were the FFFC and FFGM (and sis who obviously wouldn't have been involved in the disappearance) they'll remain POI's until someone's charged. And of course they should remain POI's because their alibi's are 'Yes we were there when he disappeared'.

However, I suspect there's someone that hasn't yet come to the attention of police because the police don't know they were there, hence that person isn't a POI.

 

[Underbelly]

Bit those 2 people had the same head investigator who you could argue went way too hard without the proper information to pin on them.
The police minister and senior officials would not authorise the current proceedings unless there was just cause and reasons imo. Being a govt department negative public outcry’s, such as that with BS attracts knee jerk reactions that they would not want again. Unless the current LE have lobbied hard, or done it regardless, which I find hard to believe imo

Like others I honestly believe it's been a pressure tactic. Someone's put a rocket up the cops after the 'Cleo' case was solved in just a few days and they've responded. Yes I think it's been an 'all guns blazing' approach.

When you think about it, they were seemingly so close to finding the perp 6 months ago but where's it at now? Someone should have been charged if there was enough evidence, the police don't need the coroner to make the decision.

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

However, I suspect there's someone that hasn't yet come to the attention of police because the police don't know they were there, hence that person isn't a POI.

Who are you thinking may of been there, hypothetically speaking of course?

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

Like others I honestly believe it's been a pressure tactic. Someone's put a rocket up the cops after the 'Cleo' case was solved in just a few days and they've responded. Yes I think it's been an 'all guns blazing' approach.

When you think about it, they were seemingly so close to finding the perp 6 months ago but where's it at now? Someone should have been charged if there was enough evidence, the police don't need the coroner to make the decision.

Completely agree. But imo the current dilemma is the fact that 7 years has passed and they’re doing searches and re-doing interviews that could’ve been done earlier. The problem with this is that evidence is exposed to weather, memories fade and people have passed. It can’t be easy for LE to get decent clumps of info without someone spilling their guts

 

[Underbelly]

Who are you thinking may of been there, hypothetically speaking of course?

I have as much idea as the cops, probably less.

 

[Underbelly]

Completely agree. But imo the current dilemma is the fact that 7 years has passed and they’re doing searches and re-doing interviews that could’ve been done earlier. The problem with this is that evidence is exposed to weather, memories fade and people have passed. It can’t be easy for LE to get decent clumps of info without someone spilling their guts

It may be that those currently making the decisions, maybe even the coroner, believe the pressure that was applied to Spedding and Savage should have been applied to the fosters as well given they were there when he disappeared. Perhaps same pressure but done within the law.

Sorry, edited to remove confusion.

 

[JBowie]

Looks like the suppression orders for naming little William's former foster carers has been removed. We had discussed this here earlier, thinking that this would be the case, as they are no longer foster carers. The Court case listing now names his former foster carer in full.

IIRC, court listings have accidentally named them in the past and were soon redacted.

 

[JBowie]

Not really because there are two POI's suing them, IIRC. So evidently they did make the same mistake twice.

Are there two? One is BS, who is the other?

(IIRC, according to his daughter, PS at one stage was considering suing but did not proceed.)

 

[SouthAussie]

Are there two? One is BS, who is the other?

(IIRC, according to his daughter, PS at one stage was considering suing but did not proceed.)

We don't know who the other one is.

I would think it is probably an early POI. Perhaps PB or TJ. Maybe even DN. Only because lawsuits usually take a long time to get to court.

If this latest search doesn't pan out, I imagine the FP will be next in the lawsuit line.


"Although the identity of the man has not been revealed, Sky News’ Political Editor Andrew Clennell says NSW Police paid the wrongly-accused person of interest a settlement of over half a million dollars, and covered his legal expenses which bought the total to a near seven-figure amount."
https://www.news.com.au/national/cr...s/news-story/219355538d15b8916587740c5c397161

 

[Travelling Wilbury]

Are there two? One is BS, who is the other?

(IIRC, according to his daughter, PS at one stage was considering suing but did not proceed.)

PS could be looking into it

Neighbour next Tyrrell ‘suspect’ to sue police?

 

[Blues Clues]

Just to be clear....
BS is suing the state of New South Wales for malicious prosecution by NSW Police and malfeasance in public office. This is in relation to the historical charges - not William's disappearance. He isn't suing because he was a POI being investigated in William's disappearance. He has stated that he understands why he was a POI as he had been at the house.

William Tyrrell 'person of interest' Bill Spedding to sue NSW Police over investigation - ABC News

 

[SLouTh]

New Charges for William's FM......

Headline in The Australian
Stalking charges for William Tyrrell’s foster mother

Paraphrasing...

William Tyrrell's FM has been charged with two counts of stalking and intimidation by NSW police.

The FM was charged on Friday.

The new charges will be heard in court on April 29, the same date as the new court listing as posted here on the thread yesterday by another WS Member @Marg944

Stalking charges for William Tyrrell’s foster mother (theaustralian.com.au)