Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #30

[Lou Lou]

Sorry, incorrect. This is what I was thinking of. I read in Courier Mail but can't get link as is pay walled.

The Daily Telegraph reports that while Ms Collins has “theories” on what took place, for legal reasons they can’t be revealed.
“Whatever they’ve done, they’ve done very well,” she said.
“It’s just a damn mess. This is the best it gets. It’s just like this every day.”

That lady has made the strangest statements. I query much about her!

 

[Violet77]

Am I imagining things, or did we hear William is an asthmatic ?

His death may have been 'accidental', as was Daniel's. Cowan didn't plan to kill him, he was only focused on satisfying his sick pedo urges !

OT from William, but I don’t believe for a second that Daniel wasn’t sexually assaulted, given Cowan’s history for violence following his sexual attacks, & given the fact that poor Daniel’s belt was taken out of the loops of his shorts.
I believe he just didn’t want to look someone in the eye & admit that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lou Lou]

Sorry, incorrect. This is what I was thinking of. I read in Courier Mail but can't get link as is pay walled.

The Daily Telegraph reports that while Ms Collins has “theories” on what took place, for legal reasons they can’t be revealed.
“Whatever they’ve done, they’ve done very well,” she said.
“It’s just a damn mess. This is the best it gets. It’s just like this every day.”

Have the media ever spoken about the FF being followed from Mosman to Kendall and if the police checked any cc tv of the trip to ensure they weren't followed? ie: Traffic cams, petrol station cctv, etc??

 

[SouthAussie]

Have the media ever spoken about the FF being followed from Mosman to Kendall and if the police checked any cc tv of the trip to ensure they weren't followed? ie: Traffic cams, petrol station cctv, etc??

No. We don't know that level of detail about the investigation, just that police are very sure that neither set of parents is involved. One would think that means they have confirmed many things about them. Perhaps CCTV of them at different places ... McDonalds, the highway, other witness statements.

One would hope that it would be like in the movies, and whoever has looked at the CCTV would notice if another vehicle kept appearing behind them along the way.



ETA: Perhaps they have even studied the CCTV, looking for that kind of thing, so they can rule it in or rule it out.
I have mentioned before that, we have noticed in other cases, much of an investigation is conducted to rule things in or out, so they can't be used in court to create reasonable doubt.

 

[Wexford]

1:20
Reporter- Have you ever seen the little boy?
BS - ......the media has reported that correctly.

Yep I agree he is hiding something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBQhdvruBU4

Evasive. Why? If he is innocent, why not say 'no never'? I would take it to mean at some time he HAS seen the child (whether or not related to the actual abduction or not). Can't tell the truth publicly but can't lie either or it will discredit everything else he has said to the LE perhaps?

 

[SouthAussie]

1:20
Reporter- Have you ever seen the little boy?
BS - ......the media has reported that correctly.

Yep I agree he is hiding something.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBQhdvruBU4

Notice, too, that way Margaret looks at him when he makes that reply. She's not sure imo.

Also ...

:44 sec mark
Do you believe that police have got the wrong man?

Spedding: <silence>
Margaret: Oh, yes.

Yet he goes on to answer the very next question - despite telling them that his lawyer said to say nothing.


That whole video is an exercise in studying human behaviour. I bet the professional speech & behaviour analysts have done some work studying that.

 

[JLZ]

Sorry, incorrect. This is what I was thinking of. I read in Courier Mail but can't get link as is pay walled.

The Daily Telegraph reports that while Ms Collins has &#8220;theories&#8221; on what took place, for legal reasons they can&#8217;t be revealed.
&#8220;Whatever they&#8217;ve done, they&#8217;ve done very well,&#8221; she said.
&#8220;It&#8217;s just a damn mess. This is the best it gets. It&#8217;s just like this every day.&#8221;

From BBM, the "damn mess" has to be something NC can directly observe--her and her son's lives, I take it.

The link between the two statements, "whatever they've done, they've done very well" and "it's just a damn mess" is [because]? They've done a very good job of making a damn mess of our lives, is that what she's saying?

So is she just self-obsessed or is her theory that William was abducted in order to injure the family, and specifically, her branch of it?

 

[JLZ]

Notice, too, that way Margaret looks at him when he makes that reply. She's not sure imo.

Also ...

:44 sec mark
Do you believe that police have got the wrong man?

Spedding: <silence>
Margaret: Oh, yes.

Yet he goes on to answer the very next question - despite telling them that his lawyer said to say nothing.


That whole video is an exercise in studying human behaviour. I bet the professional speech & behaviour analysts have done some work studying that.

My reading is that she's looking at him for two reasons. One, they've just agreed not to talk to reporters and here they are talking to reporters. Are we going to continue with this or not? He's the one accused; she's deferring to him for the decision. But behind that there seems to be an honest curiosity as to what he will say if he chooses to answer. Perhaps he refuses to discuss the matter with her--blows up, you either trust me or you don't.

 

[SouthAussie]

My reading is that she's looking at him for two reasons. One, they've just agreed not to talk to reporters and here they are talking to reporters. Are we going to continue with this or not? He's the one accused; she's deferring to him for the decision. But behind that there seems to be an honest curiosity as to what he will say if he chooses to answer. Perhaps he refuses to discuss the matter with her--blows up, you either trust me or you don't.

Yes. She would know better than most how to read his body language, and his ways of answering or not answering questions. Having been married for quite a few years.
She certainly had a different look about her at this part of the video, than at any other part where he answers or doesn't answer.

 

[sosocurious]

My reading is that she's looking at him for two reasons. One, they've just agreed not to talk to reporters and here they are talking to reporters. Are we going to continue with this or not? He's the one accused; she's deferring to him for the decision. But behind that there seems to be an honest curiosity as to what he will say if he chooses to answer. Perhaps he refuses to discuss the matter with her--blows up, you either trust me or you don't.

Would she have known about the spiderman toy in the work van at this point?
I guess she would have given she was aware a child gave it to BS to keep him company.

Would she have known what he had said in his 10 page statement to police? That he had given dna?

Doesn't appear that they talked to much if MS was only learning BS thinks he had been to that house while watching the news that evening.

The question that did seem to rattle MS was "What would you like to say to the Tyrrell family?"
Maybe she knew a whole lot more than the public about the complicated family history and she just thought oh shyte?

"This is ridiculous" ....she said. "No comment" said BS.

What is ridiculous about police following up with their inquiries as they are expected to do, according to BS?
With police inquiries come media attention especially when a young three year old boy has vanished and you were expected at that very house that morning to repair the machine, according to some media reports. Which BS said more than once reported correctly.

None the less BS did address that question much further down the track, with his own video release.

I wonder how many times he watch himself and his wife being interviewed?

jmo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBQhdvruBU4

 

[JLZ]

Soso. I don't know about how police operate--but I would think BS and MS would have been interviewed separately at the same time? Didn't he go back a few days later to change something he said?--may have been because he found out MS gave a conflicting account of something and he needed to do some damage control.

 

[SouthAussie]

Something else I noticed in another article, about the historical child sex crimes, was that Spedding refused to participate in a police interview about those crimes.


"He spent Wednesday night in the cells at Port Macquarie police station and declined to take part in a formal interview.

Police argued the accused should not be granted bail because one of his alleged victims said she had felt pressured by him in recent months to make a statement about his good character."

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/william-t...phile-ring-police-allege-20150423-1mrvj7.html

 

[sosocurious]

Something else I noticed in another article, about the historical child sex crimes, was that Spedding refused to participate in a police interview about those crimes.


"He spent Wednesday night in the cells at Port Macquarie police station and declined to take part in a formal interview.

Police argued the accused should not be granted bail because one of his alleged victims said she had felt pressured by him in recent months to make a statement about his good character."

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/william-t...phile-ring-police-allege-20150423-1mrvj7.html

It also emerged some evidence had been lost.
"Mr Spedding was spoken to by the police about these allegations and that interview has been lost," Mr Everson told the court.
While the crown knows Mr Spedding denied the allegations, it did not know what form the allegations took and how they compared with recent statements.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/william-b...hild-sexual-assault-case-20160907-grako8.html

 

[SouthAussie]

It also emerged some evidence had been lost.
"Mr Spedding was spoken to by the police about these allegations and that interview has been lost," Mr Everson told the court.
While the crown knows Mr Spedding denied the allegations, it did not know what form the allegations took and how they compared with recent statements.

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/william-b...hild-sexual-assault-case-20160907-grako8.html

Evidently, no interview in April 2015 upon his arrest. But had made a statement(s) to them prior to September 2016. Perhaps after he had time to formulate his thoughts a bit.

Though statements do not mean an interview. They can be just events according to him and communicated to the police by himself or his lawyer.


A police statement is a written document stating your version of events regarding a crime and which is signed and dated by you.
https://www.gotocourt.com.au/criminal-law/police-statements/

 

[sosocurious]

Soso. I don't know about how police operate--but I would think BS and MS would have been interviewed separately at the same time? Didn't he go back a few days later to change something he said?--may have been because he found out MS gave a conflicting account of something and he needed to do some damage control.

Apparently JLZ.

This being the article that cause the complaint to Australian Press Council.

It is understood Mr Spedding has been previously interviewed by police on two occasions. The second time he voluntarily returned to give officers a statement.
Did his solicitor accompany him the second time?

Colin said Mr Spedding had visited William's grandmother's house on Monday, September 8, but needed to order a part, which arrived on Thursday September 11.
He said that, when Mr Spedding got in touch with the family on Friday, the day that William went missing, he initially couldn't get a hold of the grandmother..............
"He's rung them again because he couldn't get them in the morning," Colin said.
"Then [William's] mother answered it and said, 'Oh I'm afraid, look I'm afraid you can't come and do it at the moment - we will give you a call when we can.' "

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/william-h...iam-tyrell-investigation-20150121-12v4n3.html

BS clarification.....:facepalm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTQvr4vkSAA

As many have asked ....why did he delete his phone log?

 

[Karinna]

Apparently JLZ.

This being the article that cause the complaint to Australian Press Council.

It is understood Mr Spedding has been previously interviewed by police on two occasions. The second time he voluntarily returned to give officers a statement.
Did his solicitor accompany him the second time?

Colin said Mr Spedding had visited William's grandmother's house on Monday, September 8, but needed to order a part, which arrived on Thursday September 11.
He said that, when Mr Spedding got in touch with the family on Friday, the day that William went missing, he initially couldn't get a hold of the grandmother..............
"He's rung them again because he couldn't get them in the morning," Colin said.
"Then [William's] mother answered it and said, 'Oh I'm afraid, look I'm afraid you can't come and do it at the moment - we will give you a call when we can.' "

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/william-h...iam-tyrell-investigation-20150121-12v4n3.html

BS clarification.....:facepalm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTQvr4vkSAA

As many have asked ....why did he delete his phone log?

BBM, I'm not sure why that is a big deal because people delete call logs on their phones all the time for whatever reason, and if necessary police can easily retrieve those deleted call logs. You can even retrieve them yourself if you want to, its not difficult to do. Whether police deemed it necessary in this case we don't know?

 

[JLZ]

Apparently JLZ.

This being the article that cause the complaint to Australian Press Council.

It is understood Mr Spedding has been previously interviewed by police on two occasions. The second time he voluntarily returned to give officers a statement.
Did his solicitor accompany him the second time?

Colin said Mr Spedding had visited William's grandmother's house on Monday, September 8, but needed to order a part, which arrived on Thursday September 11.
He said that, when Mr Spedding got in touch with the family on Friday, the day that William went missing, he initially couldn't get a hold of the grandmother..............
"He's rung them again because he couldn't get them in the morning," Colin said.
"Then [William's] mother answered it and said, 'Oh I'm afraid, look I'm afraid you can't come and do it at the moment - we will give you a call when we can.' "

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/william-h...iam-tyrell-investigation-20150121-12v4n3.html

BS clarification.....:facepalm:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTQvr4vkSAA

As many have asked ....why did he delete his phone log?

That article seems fair enough to me. I wonder whether the complaint was an ambit to send the message that the Speddings were prepared to fight back, so journalists would know to be especially careful of what they might say about him in future.

 

[sosocurious]

BBM, I'm not sure why that is a big deal because people delete call logs on their phones all the time for whatever reason, and if necessary police can easily retrieve those deleted call logs. You can even retrieve them yourself if you want to, its not difficult to do. Whether police deemed it necessary in this case we don't know?

Police seized his telephone records and those of William&#8217;s grandmother as they have checked his statement that he had a missed call from the grandmother that morning and tried to call back but could not get through.
A friend of Mr Spedding&#8217;s said yesterday that police had questioned Mr Spedding about &#8220;why the phone calls were no longer in the call log on his mobile phone.&#8221;

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/n...l/news-story/a92dc8eaef8d7a48f25e7673fd7f2cf1

 

[sosocurious]

That article seems fair enough to me. I wonder whether the complaint was an ambit to send the message that the Speddings were prepared to fight back, so journalists would know to be especially careful of what they might say about him in future.

Or for his friends and family to be careful what they say to the media.

&#8220;I&#8217;ll get through this,&#8221; Ms Spedding said after the hearing, while declining to answer further questions.
&#8220;I&#8217;ll have a lot to say later, when I&#8217;m ready.&#8221;
https://www.theaustralian.com.au/ne...d/news-story/60e517cfba665cfb3adc60b763b674d4
Sex-ring assaults of sisters alleged

 

[Wexford]

Police seized his telephone records and those of William&#8217;s grandmother as they have checked his *statement that he had a missed call from the grandmother that morning and tried to call back but could not get through.
A friend of Mr Spedding&#8217;s said yesterday that police had questioned Mr Spedding about &#8220;why the phone calls were no longer in the call log on his mobile phone.&#8221;

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/n...l/news-story/a92dc8eaef8d7a48f25e7673fd7f2cf1

I can think of no good reason why anyone would delete their phone logs. I can think of plenty of reasons why someone would do it that are not good which would make LE suspicious. They were trying to check out his story and found discrepancies. Along with the invisible visit to the school and the coffee shop of course. I wonder what else?