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

[Doesitmakesense]

That is very perceptive of you. I searched back to see if I could find another instance of the FPs saying they had not visited since the FGF had died the previous February, and what I found was another instance of uncertainty (hadn't had a chance to visit him since February, doesn't necessarily state the FPs hadn't been back in Kendall at all since February, I suppose?) ETA: as well, FM stated here that 'she' hadn't had a chance to visit her dad, rather than stating 'they' hadn't had a chance to visit? hmmm, interesting, good catch!

starting approx 1:00:

1:01 FM: It was just any other normal day for us when we visit mom's. We got up, the kids are playing, we started to talk about what we were going to do for that day. One of the things we needed to do was to go see my dad's grave. He passed away in February 2014 and just um as things had moved through, for us, I hadn't hadn’t had a, I hadn’t had a chance to um visit him since we'd put him into the ground, so we were planning to do that?

I don't know how to do the bold thing.
What stood out to me in that was she said "I hadn’t had a chance to um visit him since we'd put him into the ground" Not that they hadn't been to visit the home, but she hadn't been to the cemetery

 

[JBowie]

I don't know how to do the bold thing.

Select the text that you want to make bold and then click on the capital B in the menu line above your post.

 

[bearbear]

Good point ...
Is it possible that William was not actually wearing the "Spiderman Suit" when he went missing??? Did he accidentally wet or soil it, and was wearing other clothes by the time he went missing??

Have Police found other clothing with William's DNA on it?? Or part of the suit without William?? I know his shoes have been mentioned by media as one possibility....of discrepancy.... but could the Police build an entire case about that???

It has to be something they can "prove" .....

There are so many possibilities for the day in question ..... but they have to be "provable" in a court of law....

Just offering this, as a possibility???? Tossing out thoughts...

i wondered this as well, if he was really wearing the spiderman suit when he disappeared ?

 

[deugirtni]

Re Overington's quoted piece of 2 September 2019 in The Australian:

"Ms Swift’s application was made in open court shortly before the inquest was suddenly adjourned for seven months."

AFAIK, only CO has used the term 'suddenly'. Given that this inquest was undertaken in tranches, it seems to me that a break of 7 months was on the Coroner's calendar for other reasons.

According to articles at the time, tranche#2 of the inquest was to take place over four weeks. The first day was August 7, 2019; four weeks later would have been September 4, 2019. Instead it ended August 28th. According to my calendar, that was one week early. I seem to remember feeling surprised that the inquest ended when it did during tranche#2 as well, IIRC. imo.

7 Aug, 2019 02:06 AM

As the inquest resumed in Sydney today, the missing boy's biological grandmother arrived at court.

The ex-detective who is the deposed head of the William Tyrrell strike force, Gary Jubelin, has also turned up on the morning of the first day of the inquest's resumption

Among more than 40 witnesses expected to be called over the next four weeks are a convicted paedophile, Anthony Jones, and two mystery women.

'Sneaky, complex': Bones, speargun found in William Tyrrell search

Police detail items possibly "connected with a small child and the disposal of a body".

www.nzherald.co.nz

 

[Detective Willy]

CO thinks it is the “Close to giving up, or giving in” statement FM made in an email to the case worker. She says they "rediscovered" the email. And that is her #1 reason for the new-ish interest.

Her #2 reason is police competitiveness, considering CS' recent case resolvement.

Her #3 reason is the allegation of assault.

Behind the silence lies so much pain, and so many questions

Close to giving up, or giving in.

amp.theaustralian.com.au

The statement by FM to the case worker that she was "close to giving up" or "close to giving in" appears to me that she was not coping very well with William being around. Mothers would not normally say something like this IMO unless they were very stressed with the situation and could not find a logical solution.

If this was the case what were her options if she still wanted to keep Williams older sister but did not want William??

My understanding is that the FC's had to keep both William and his sister or could keep neither permanently.

The fact that William disappeared in unexplained/mysterious circumstances shortly after this statement to the case worker is IMO a massive red flag.

I wonder how long it was before police became aware of this statement made by FC to the case worker?

We are not aware what happened to William but I have an overpowering suspicion of the FC's due to:

1) statement by FM to case worker
2) unexplained drive by FM
3) the 000 call
4) discrepancies in later statements by FM and contradictions to the 000 call
5) large chunk of deleted text messages between FF and FM
6) recent assault charges
7) recent charges of lying to the NSW Crime Commission
8) mysterious "bruising" to Williams face in photos prior to his disappearance and some alleged "accidents"

I could add a few more points but this is why I keep going down this rabbit hole.

 

[Megnut]

Listening to just the first ten minutes or so...

Observations:

She's told the details so often it's hard to remember them?

She looked for Wm for "ten minutes or so"* (in the yard) before alerting FGma.

She recalled noticing the cars 1st thing that morning when she awoke and opened the sliders (to the high veranda). Parked between driveways. She claimed it seemed odd to her.

Why? It wasn't her neighborhood. Perhaps cars parked there frequently, perhaps the neighbors had guests or staff or spare vehicles. Nothing odd about that.

He described how Wm awakened full of energy, setting about taking all the toys out. ("But that's fine/okay" he said.) He further recalled his last memory of Wm. "He was already wearing [the Spiderman outfit], I think."

My thoughts:

Question: if a young child disappeared around the corner, and no sign of him were there, wouldn't you continue around the house to see if he'd simply circled around to the patio?

Do her actions show "consciousness of guilt" -- foreknowledge, actions in support of him being missing (not findable), in furtherance of a built, false narrative?

Do those "ten minutes or so" coincide with a drive away from the property? Seems likely to me.

Her description of playing with Wm in the garden sounds very much like something only she and Wm were doing....

Did that event/narrative occur just prior to the "ten minutes or so" which would extend her window for being away from the patio and away from the home by a fair amount of time?

Those deleted texts -- what did they contain? Conversations about difficulties with fostering? Marital discord? Third parties?

IF there was marital discord (relative to fostering Wm or any other reason) and IF Wm was injured fatally and accidentally, did FFC pivot and decide she needed to hold things together? Hide Wm, claim abduction because she feared the fall-out of negligence, if so charged, but not just by LE, but from her spouse and from the foster system (losing fostership of the girl)?

Self-preservation can be a powerful motivator.

JMO

It's from 1.57 mins into this.

Bringing these forward. When FFM describes the morning, he said Wm was already in his Spiderman outfit, he thinks. Seems like something like that would be locked in.

Could it be that FFM left before Wm was dressed, hence the familiar detail, the odd overshare from the FFF about her difficulty dressing Wm (the singlet debate)?

Purely my speculation but could it have been that FFM left twice? Maybe once to get the newspaper (Wm nit dressed) and once for the work meeting and script errand (Wm dresses)? Not sure how that'd impact the timeline, just thinking out loud. Possibly Wm was dressed between those trips and the trips are significant somehow. (Again, I am only speculating on two trips.)

In any event, I think it's exceedingly possible that Wm took off around the corner (perhaps to escape discipline regarding the proper rolling of dice) and the FFF followed/chased him in that direction and IMO did not return to the tea making for 20 minutes or more. An important absence.

JMO

 

[FromGermany1]

That is very perceptive of you. I searched back to see if I could find another instance of the FPs saying they had not visited since the FGF had died the previous February, and what I found was another instance of uncertainty (hadn't had a chance to visit him since February, doesn't necessarily state the FPs hadn't been back in Kendall at all since February, I suppose?) ETA: as well, FM stated here that 'she' hadn't had a chance to visit her dad, rather than stating 'they' hadn't had a chance to visit? hmmm, interesting, good catch!

starting approx 1:00:

1:01 FM: It was just any other normal day for us when we visit mom's. We got up, the kids are playing, we started to talk about what we were going to do for that day. One of the things we needed to do was to go see my dad's grave. He passed away in February 2014 and just um as things had moved through, for us, I hadn't hadn’t had a, I hadn’t had a chance to um visit him since we'd put him into the ground, so we were planning to do that?

bbm
Seems striking to stutter during such an innocuous statement, to me at least. MOO

 

[deugirtni]

Omg thank you for this. I’m so happy you shared this. Because this here makes things crystal clear for me. No uncertainty from me anymore. <modsnip> Imo It’s more than a coincidence what’s been happening lately. The lies and deception have to do with court being adjourned so swiftly. Imo. And the current charges point to the time stamped pictures evidently. It all makes sense now..imo moo

It could be many many things. The photo discrepancies may just have been the catalyst to prompt LE (or the coroner perhaps, who in turn may have made demands on LE?) seriously revisiting things in regard to the carers?

Off the top of my head:
-could LE have gone back to the cell tower data records and/or GPS data (phone/vehicle?) to look into *earlier* than the 9:37am time? Is it possible they took the photo at face value initially and therefore didn't bother to look into the hours prior to that time? It had been reported by LE that FD had been found to have been where he'd said he had been, but... what about BEFORE that? I have always wondered if they even bothered checking that.
-another possibility is something to do with the couple's cellphones - and what they had stated didn't match the phone data?
-possibly the FPs may have stated that W had never been inside FGM's vehicle, but perhaps something was found to prove otherwise?
-is it possible FM called FD regarding the absence of William prior to him arriving back at Benaroon, but both of them had stated FD didn't know until he arrived?
-could FM have been recorded on someone's CCTV somewhere, sometime after the fact, showing she had taken her mother's vehicle out somewhere other than where she had stated? The public didn't even know what type or color vehicle these people drove prior to the inquest, four and a half years later, and maybe even later to identify the FGM's vehicle? (And the public still to this day (for the most part) don't know the names and/or appearances of the FPs.) What if someone in the area had saved CCTV from that time, but didn't know the importance of something seen on their recording until something came to light years later - at which time they handed it over to LE? So much was kept so secret for so long in this case.

The list could go on indefinitely, and it doesn't have to be something we (the public) necessarily are privy to, as far as what untruths were told to the Crime Commission? There have been soooooooooooooo many discrepancies every step of the way with this case, they could've tried to pin them down more during a hearing with the CC, and then found something was otherwise.

Just my opinion, but the untruth would have to have been substantial for LE to actually press charges on that, it wouldn't just be a lapse in memory, or one saying one minor detail while the other FP stated a different minor detail - it would have to have been a deliberate, bold-faced... untruth.

 

[FromGermany1]

If this was the case what were her options if she still wanted to keep Williams older sister but did not want William??

My understanding is that the FC's had to keep both William and his sister or could keep neither permanently.

^^ This. I can imagine, this was the starting point of action. If MFC was involved, I'm still hesitating to decide. MOO

 

[deugirtni]

She said why.

Because the driveways are so long there that people dont usually park on the street, it would take 3 or 4 minutes to walk to the house. (Obviously she is not good with time imo . But I think her point was it is a longish walk to the house, when you can just park in the long driveway.)

I am not saying the cars were or were not there. It has always been a mystery to us why the police waited a year to tell us about them.

But she did say why she thought that it was odd.

And then when the inquest rolled along four and a half years later, and the coroner released the 'walk-through' video recorded September 18th (6 days after W's disappearance) of FM telling Det Partridge about how she drove to the riding school - I believe in that video we can see a white vehicle parked on the street. And FM stated they hadn't visited since February, seven months earlier, and I'm not sure FM had ever lived in that home herself, how would she presume to know whether that was an odd occurrence? imo.

 

[katydid23]

Appreciate that you don't agree and I put these questions forward:

1) Do police know a lot more about what happened before and after William's disappearance than we do? 100% they do.
2) Are they keeping the most important information to themselves for operational reasons? 100% they are.
3) Are the "keystone cops" running this investigation or do we have faith in our highest ranking homicide detectives in NSW?

I have faith in the Detectives that are now investigating this case and love the perseverance of the NSW Police in not letting this go. It would be easy to give up and they are not.

If William was abducted then the offender was very clever, very lucky and the 2 carers of William were very ignorant to not see or hear a thing IMO.

The stealth that the "abducter" must have acted with in broad daylight mid morning:

1) to enter the property without being seen
2) to grab William without being seen
3) to bundle William into a car without being seen or anyone hearing a scream
4) to leave Benaroon drive and not be seen or heard when exiting vehicle with William
5) to not be captured on any CCTV
6) to possibly assault, murder and dispose of William without being seen or his remains being found
7) to not discuss this with anyone

Justice for William will take time but the fact that Police are pursuing this now harder than ever is something we should all be happy about IMO.

William would be turning 11 in just under 3 weeks (DOB 26.6.11).

My statement was that I did not agree with you' that ALL of the officers knew who was Guilty in William's case. '

You asked:
1) Do police know a lot more about what happened before and after William's disappearance than we do? 100% they do.
2) Are they keeping the most important information to themselves for operational reasons? 100% they are.
3) Are the "keystone cops" running this investigation or do we have faith in our highest ranking homicide detectives in NSW?

Sure, to question 1 and 2. But that doesn't mean they know 100% for certain who the guilty party is and are all in agreement. They know a lot more than we do but it doesn't mean they know everything for certain. JMO

As to your 'keystone cops' question, I am not sure where you got that, but it wasn't anywhere in any of my posts. I have the utmost respect for them. That doesn't mean that they couldn't have internal conflicts concerning their beliefs about the case.

If William was abducted then the offender was very clever, very lucky and the 2 carers of William were very ignorant to not see or hear a thing IMO.

I disagree with the above. Are we going to label all parents/caregivers of missing children as ignorant because they didn't see it happen?

The stealth that the "abducter" must have acted with in broad daylight mid morning:

1) to enter the property without being seen
2) to grab William without being seen
3) to bundle William into a car without being seen or anyone hearing a scream
4) to leave Benaroon drive and not be seen or heard when exiting vehicle with William
5) to not be captured on any CCTV
6) to possibly assault, murder and dispose of William without being seen or his remains being found
7) to not discuss this with anyone

I don't think it would have taken that much stealth. The whole thing may have happened within a minute. And we don't even know how exactly. Maybe Will ran away from the property and was picked up around the corner? Or maybe he ran past one of the neighbours homes and was quickly walked inside, never to be seen again.

Or maybe one of the local pedos drove up just in time to see Will running and they grabbed him and put him onto the car. That would make about 30 seconds and there is no reason to believe there would be any noise or even any screams. Toddlers do not always scream when they are shocked by a sudden situation.

1--who was going to see them? It's been established many of the closest neighbours were not home. Others were likely inside their homes, busy.

2--who would see that? Did anyone report seeing the kids out front riding their bicycles all that time?

3--Again, who would have been there to see it? And how do we know there was a scream?

4---again, by whom?

5---was there any cctv?

As to all of the above, can we say the same thing about no one having seen FM harm Will and then dispose of him? Anyone hear screams or see her put him in a car and drive him away? No cctvs of that act?

6) to possibly assault, murder and dispose of William without being seen or his remains being found
7) to not discuss this with anyone

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

 

[katydid23]

^^ This. I can imagine, this was the starting point of action. If MFC was involved, I'm still hesitating to decide. MOO

So she would kill William so she could keep caring for his sister?

 

[iiiii's]

Isn't that usually the type of thing that comes out during a trial, when the prosecution presents its case... by possibly showing a given defendant lied about whatever? I wouldn't expect police to disclose that at all, after the FPs had publicly stated they hadn't visited since FM's father died. imo.

That's if it was a lie, but what if they had disclosed other visits to police, why would the police be quiet about that and let the public think they had not visited since her father died? When I roll that idea around in my head,I think it would be to not tip off someone else possibly.

I think the FFC has a hobit of not saying what she means, maybe to be brief. I think in the articles that have been pointed out by other members it's possible she was saying they hadn't been back to visit her father's grave since it had a headstone put on it. IMO

 

[SLouTh]

If this was the case what were her options if she still wanted to keep Williams older sister but did not want William??

My understanding is that the FC's had to keep both William and his sister or could keep neither permanently.

The fact that William disappeared in unexplained/mysterious circumstances shortly after this statement to the case worker is IMO a massive red flag.

Are you thinking of possibly pre-meditated murder here Det W???? Rather than a possible accident or possible fit of rage incident??

I definitely agree that all possibilities need to be considered equally and objectively no matter how much we don't want to believe that something / someone, could be the true story.....

I just hope we are not still here debating in 20 years time... sometimes it just seems like such a slow investigation....
IMO

 

[Detective Willy]

Are you thinking of possibly pre-meditated murder here Det W???? Rather than a possible accident or possible fit of rage incident??

I definitely agree that all possibilities need to be considered equally and objectively no matter how much we don't want to believe that something / someone, could be the true story.....

I just hope we are not still here debating in 20 years time... sometimes it just seems like such a slow investigation....
IMO

I'm not sure but possibly a fit of rage or an accident that if covered up on the run might have an upside (in her mind)? Not sure what underlying mental health issues there could be with FM?

Was William's disappearance a possible solution to FM not coping with him?

I would hate to think it was arranged for William to be handed over to someone else and there was a carefully orchestrated plan.

The police have been like a dog on a bone in the last 2 years and I keep wondering why? There must be more to this.

 

[deugirtni]

....

As to all of the above, can we say the same thing about no one having seen FM harm Will and then dispose of him? Anyone hear screams or see her put him in a car and drive him away? No cctvs of that act?

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

Imho, one can't really compare the carers with everyone/anyone else, because they had the care and control of William, from the time of arrival at 9pm the evening before, until the 000 call was made at almost 11am. Anything could've happened inside that house during any of those hours really, and nobody would've been the wiser. It would've been rather simple to carry something/someone out of that house via the door leading directly to the carport, and if dark, who would've seen that?

In earlier days, I believe we heard that LE did not check inside the trunks of the fosters' vehicles on the day of disappearance? I don't think we're sure whether or not LE checked GPS and cell tower data of vehicles during the hours prior to 9:30, when it was supposed to have been a time that could be relied upon for last evidence of life. In contrast, a stranger would've had to gain access to someone's property, snatch a child in silence, and disappear in broad daylight without anyone seeing or hearing a thing. That stranger would've been out of place at FGM's house. I remember in early days thinking nobody was outside.. but we later discovered there was all kinds of activity with all kinds of neighbours going on that morning on the street. HS leaving for Bingo, PS at home, apparently owl guy at home, lawn mower man mowing, LH leaving to go grocery shopping and then returning, the Crabbs, AMS taking her kids to school and then sneaking smokes outside her house however often she may have needed a smoke(?).. it seems like it would've been an extreme stroke of luck for none of these neighbours to see or hear a thing, considering they were all in and out and around and home and etc. imo.

 

[SLouTh]

I would hate to think it was arranged for William to be handed over to someone else and there was a carefully orchestrated plan.

at this scenario ...... Could this actually happen in Australia??? And in this particular case, undetected by so many Police for such a long time??? I am not sure my head can even go there....

Police seem to have the current theory that dear little William is deceased.... so not sure if that would fit with the scenario???

IMO

 

[deugirtni]

That's if it was a lie, but what if they had disclosed other visits to police, why would the police be quiet about that and let the public think they had not visited since her father died? When I roll that idea around in my head,I think it would be to not tip off someone else possibly.

I think the FFC has a hobit of not saying what she means, maybe to be brief. I think in the articles that have been pointed out by other members it's possible she was saying they hadn't been back to visit her father's grave since it had a headstone put on it. IMO

There are at least two interviews where FM has said she hadn't been to see her dad since he died. Where would that have been changed to that she hadn't been to visit her dad's grave since a headstone had been put on it?

And why would one presume LE would monitor the fosters interviews to then make a public correction to their words, if LE knew she had made a mistake and had said something in at least two publicly broadcasted interviews that she had said contradictory info about during LE interviews? I wouldn't think it's LE's place to do such a thing? Sorry if I'm not really comprehending what you're getting at?!

 

[deugirtni]

That's if it was a lie, but what if they had disclosed other visits to police, why would the police be quiet about that and let the public think they had not visited since her father died? When I roll that idea around in my head,I think it would be to not tip off someone else possibly.

I think the FFC has a hobit of not saying what she means, maybe to be brief. I think in the articles that have been pointed out by other members it's possible she was saying they hadn't been back to visit her father's grave since it had a headstone put on it. IMO

PS imho, FM is the least brief person ever (yes exaggerating!)! At least when it comes to talking about mundane things, like for example, going on about how W didn't want to wear a singlet and how she then suggested.... on and on about the spiderman outfit being worn that day.

 

[deugirtni]

So she would kill William so she could keep caring for his sister?

Is it possible she did something other than kill him and dump his body? At this point, it seems like anything is on the table, including the unlikely possibility that she 'could' have given him to someone, or sold him to someone... I don't like to say that.. but perhaps she knew a childless couple who wanted a little boy, slipped out while nobody was paying attention, for a prearranged meeting at the side of a road somewhere?