Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sep 2014 - #71

[seekingjustice**]

With respect, who is to say that of those same hard working detectives who were, and still are on the case, agreed with how things were being done previously? It was said (I believe at GJ's trial) there were some who believed the fosters should have been investigated more fully, imo. I believe there were some who may have disagreed with GJ's methods of investigating certain POIs, and/or who was being investigated and who was not being investigated (ie I believe someone believed the postie should be investigated more fully, while some believed PS wasn't involved?). I recall reading that GJ and Lambert 'came to blows' regarding GJ's treatment of PS and/or which POIs would be presented to the coroner. There were some who believed GJ should question the fosters more fully, and I believe that is when GJ claims he interviewed them and 'went hard on them' (I think those were the words used?), but that wasn't until much time had passed. Those hard working detectives still had to report to their supervisor in the case, and presumably had to perform whatever operations were approved by their supervisor, and maybe not so much what their own thoughts would have been? imo.

Spot on.

 

[deugirtni]

The coroner is not questioning what day the photos were taken. It is simply the time stamp that requires clarification. If there was any doubt the photo was photoshopped or taken a different day the coroner would be questioning it. If it’s accepted by the coroner and strike force rosann, l think we need to accept that as fact.

If the coroner demanded the photos be investigated independently (which she did), AND they were found to have been tampered with (which we wouldn't know as that type of finding would be held for a criminal trial I would imagine?), then I'm quite certain that absolutely everything about those photos would need to be examined fully, including whether any photoshopping type of tampering was done, the date as well as time, etc. The coroner and her assistant and police had all accepted the photos at face value until the end of the second tranche of the inquest, when the discrepancy was noticed by legal counsel and questioned, and police were unable to provide an answer as to how the adjusted time was determined. imo. To me, there are hardly any absolute facts in this case as there are an incredible number of discrepancies everywhere.

 

[k-mac]

So how did the fosterers assault, murder and dispose of William w/out being seen, his remains found, and not discussing it w/anyone?

Well the same theory can be said for the boogie man katy.

its oranges and oranges really.

moo

 

[deugirtni]

Well the same theory can be said for the boogie man katy.

its oranges and oranges really.

moo

Except that the fosters had unencumbered access to William, no questions asked, as they were his carers, responsible for him, etc., while the boogieman would've had much more difficulty in slipping by discreetly with a toddler in tow, imho.

 

[k-mac]

I've thought off and on many times.. maybe it's my imagination, because I haven't studied other cases to see for sure.. but it seems to me that in missing child cases, there seems to pretty much always be someone who saw SOMETHING, even if it may have seemed insignificant at the time. There is a case here that is terrible.. a girl disappeared after school about 50-some years ago, never to be seen again. ... and that case is still mostly unsolved (police seem to believe they know who took her and killed her, and he is dead, and was never charged).. I so hope that this case is not 20 years or 50 years. In the case above, police discovered one of the girl's shoes on a roadway, and someone saw her talking after school to a man in a car, and the car was described. Even in that highly unusual C case recently, didn't someone see something, a vehicle I think? Just in my head, I feel like there's always something (or the child ends up being found quicker than not, alive or dead).. but in this case there is absolutely nothing. imo.

No trace?
It usually means the time line is waaaaaaaaaay out.
It will never gel or make sense or be endorced by witnesses because it can't.

moo

 

[LolaAngelina]

If the coroner demanded the photos be investigated independently (which she did), AND they were found to have been tampered with (which we wouldn't know as that type of finding would be held for a criminal trial I would imagine?), then I'm quite certain that absolutely everything about those photos would need to be examined fully, including whether any photoshopping type of tampering was done, the date as well as time, etc. The coroner and her assistant and police had all accepted the photos at face value until the end of the second tranche of the inquest, when the discrepancy was noticed by legal counsel and questioned, and police were unable to provide an answer as to how the adjusted time was determined. imo. To me, there are hardly any absolute facts in this case as there are an incredible number of discrepancies everywhere.

Again it’s only the time stamp she requires verification on. <modsnip>

 

[SouthAussie]

I wonder why the DM hasn't published an article about the hearing yesterday. It seems noticeably unusual for them.

 

[T-dawg420]

I recall reading that GJ and Lambert 'came to blows' regarding GJ's treatment of PS and/or which POIs would be presented to the coroner.

You are correct.

“”On July, 31, 2018, tensions between Det Sgt Lambert and Jubelin boiled over.

At 9:55am inside a briefing room, the strike force discussed what evidence would be presented to the coroner’s court.

According to a witness statement tendered in court, Jubelin and Det Sgt Lambert disagreed over how material from the listening devices inside Savage’s home would be presented.

That led into an argument and Jubelin asked everyone to leave the room.

“I tried to placate him,” Jubelin said during his police interview.

“He came at me and wanted to fight me. We both fight, I’ve sparred with him but he’s six times Australian kickboxing champion.

“I’ve thrown my stuff down and stood my ground. He’s being grabbed by other people.

“He says come on I’ll have you now, let’s go to the PCYC.”

Det Sgt Lambert went on sick leave.””

The ironic Prosecution of Gary Jubelin — MacDougall & Hydes Lawyers

In 2020 we represented former Detective Chief Inspector Gary Jubelin in a case that generated significant public interest. After a 2 week hearing, a Local Court Magistrate found Gary guilty of breaching the Surveillance Devices Act (2007) . He was convicted and received a fine of $10,000.00. D

www.macdougallhydes.com.au

 

[LolaAngelina]

I wonder why the DM hasn't published an article about the hearing yesterday. It seems noticeably unusual for them.

Yes very strange! Candice never misses an opportunity to add 1 new sentence of information and then the rest is all rehashed stuff.

 

[T-dawg420]

From the same article as I posted above. Seems to be a lot of “he said/he said” stuff when it comes to former Detective Jubelin. Similar to BS and all the “he said“ vs “no I didnt say it like that” kinda jaz with former Detective Jubelin. Of course imo, moo


“”One of Jubelin’s charges related to an earlier phone call he recorded with Savage in November, 2017.

According to one member of the strike force, Detective Senior Constable Greg Gallyot, Jubelin pulled him into a room and asked him to record the call while he put his phone on speaker.

Gallyot gave evidence he was “shocked” and hesitated before Jubelin told him: “Just do it”.

Jubelin denied saying those words and told the court there was no opposition to his request.

Gallyot, who started his dream job at unsolved homicide on the day he made his statement about the call, told the court he didn’t want to speak up initially because he was scared of being bullied or belittled by Jubelin.

Other officers on the strike force told the court they had never seen Jubelin bully or intimidate his staff.””

 

[katydid23]

Well the same theory can be said for the boogie man katy.

its oranges and oranges really.

moo

EXACTLY, that was my point.

I was replying to someone who asked how an abductor got away with it and was not seen by anyone. And I said, I can ask the same thing about the theory that the FM did something to him that morning. Oranges and oranges, I agree.

 

[iiiii's]

dbm

 

[Warshawski]

The last session in Taree was cut short due to Covid, that was the only session that was cut short.

However, imo, at the time, it was stated that a witness had come forward, someone previously not known to Police, and they were now providing assistance - IMO .

 

[nightrider17]

So Warshawski do you think this witness that has came forward - do you believe this is the person they are referring to as police informant?

 

[Warshawski]

I accept that now: not necessarily. I haven't, though, seen it said that the NSWCC did in fact hold a hearing in this matter. I don't think interrogation by NSWCC is the same thing as a hearing. I could be wrong.

I’m not sure that they aren’t the one & same thing ( interrogation v hearing by NSWCC) IMO, they‘re not there to mess around

What happens if I am summoned to attend the NSW Crime Commission? | NGM Lawyers

What happens if I’ve received a Summons to attend the NSW Crime Commission? Get sound advice from our criminal defence lawyers now.

ngm.com.au

A hearing or examination at the Crime Commission is conducted before a Commissioner or Assistant Commissioner, in a closed environment.

https://www.lecc.nsw.gov.au/pdf-files/information-for-witnesses.pdf

 

[Warshawski]

I doubt if alllllll of the other media outlets/companies would have failed to publish those very important results of the photo discrepancy investigation, if the results were included in that release of docs. imo. It seems to have only been reported by CO at one news agency, who failed to quote her source or even her reasoning for reporting that. From memory I believe it was subsequently reported by another news agency, to me, from memory, it sounded like it had just been copied from CO's article (based on the report being similar if not same). imo.

I agree D. . Such a huge point of interest, results of which would IMO be reported far & wide. I feel there must be a very good reason why we’re not privy to any more definite results of that investigation.
(I wonder how all those investigators who put so much stead, from the outset, into the validity of timelines based on those photos, Felt - when the question was raised by bio-Dad’s solicitor ) just my personal musings ….

 

[LolaAngelina]

However, imo, at the time, it was stated that a witness had come forward, someone previously not known to Police, and they were now providing assistance - IMO .

That was given as the reason the inquest was cut short? I don’t remember that, do you have a link?

 

[Awakening]

I wonder why the DM hasn't published an article about the hearing yesterday. It seems noticeably unusual for them.

Maybe Candace is on holiday

 

[Awakening]

That was given as the reason the inquest was cut short? I don’t remember that, do you have a link?

From my memory MSM reported that the "big dig" late last was year was because a "brand new witness we didn't previously know about has come forward"

I will google now and see if I can find it.

 

[Warshawski]

So Warshawski do you think this witness that has came forward - do you believe this is the person they are referring to as police informant?

IMO, things took a huge ‘shift’ as a result of that ‘witness’ coming forward.

The inquest went into a very looong break, another huge search was conducted with ‘stuff’ found & taken away for examination, Police honing in on a POI, FFGM‘s car taken for examination, FFC‘s both before the NSWCC - and now facing charges as a result of those sessions …

Is that ‘witness’ the now mentioned ‘police informant‘ ? I don’t know. Maybe . .. or maybe that ‘witness’ provided & led police to so much more.