Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #31

[they'll get you]

So when he was out repairing white goods anywhere. Who was at the pawn shop covering all those important duties?

Does anyone remember us sleuthing the pawnbroker shop and the aerial map showed someone sitting/standing on the little top floor balcony?
It’s vague but I recall the talk that someone may have lived there.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[SouthAussie]

Look my memory's not what it should be and I have no links, so it will have to be IMO, but I seem to remember from the very early days that it was said that William had been taken before. Maybe this was when it was?

I also remember us discussing that perhaps that was why the FM responded with something like , 'Someone's taken him'. Again, no links, so IMO





Yay!!! I did a multi-quote!

Firstly, congratulations on the mutli quote

Secondly, what about this? Was this when William had been hidden before? And did Daryl Clifford know he was hiding William, if it was?


William's grandmother, Natalie Collins, earlier said she was in a relationship with Daryl, from Quakers Hill in Sydney's west, in the 1980s.

But their relationship fell apart. Afterward, Daryl met his long time wife Karen, and the pair had Michael in 1995.

Ms Collins claimed the Clifford family briefly gave William and his biological parents a place to stay when he was a baby.

'William lived with Daryl and Karen and Michael for a few months when he was a baby,' she said.

'They took Karlie and Brendan in to live with them'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rrell-s-mother-Karlie-pictured-stays-mum.html

 

[frogwell]

There must have been a good reason she was not considered before she assisted in hiding William...imo

I don't know if that is necessarily true. I don't mean to be controversial but there are plenty of stories on the net of children having next of kin, perfectly able to take them in and they are passed over frequently, and judges regularly passing over any other professionals that families bring into the court and taking the FaCs psychologist and case worker notes, which many people's experiences of them are dishonest or embellished. Someone on here regularly sites how her friend had to give up a lot of financial stability and savings to be awarded custody of her grandchildren. Just from hearing that, why did she have to pay a fortune just to show she is appropriate? Why wasn't it already evident? NC says her, BC and KT paid $4500 to try to fight it out in court. Lots of people have plenty going for them to take on relatives kids but they are overlooked. As a friend of mine said, Family court is a misnomer and it is all about who has the most money is the last one left standing. When a child becomes a foster child, they are worth a lot of money to a great many people and I am not talking about the careers. It has become evident in many countries that the foster system is a form of people trafficking. I don't think BC's or KT's extended family could ever have provided the type of life that the FF could, but then most families can't. I get a little tired of hearing all these assumptions about the FF based on absolutely nothing except what people project onto them. I've heard on here a lot that it was so wonderful that they opened their home to these 2 children who needed it. Maybe it met the needs of the FF to have an instant family, two children that they had from almost babies that they could raise as their own, call their own name and treat as closely as possible as if they had them biologically themselves. I have questions about where LT was before her brother was also removed and then the 2 of them placed together, and now here is the question I think I will get yelled at the most about but I can't hold it in anymore, were they earmarked for this couple all along? MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

I don't know if that is necessarily true. I don't mean to be controversial but there are plenty of stories on the net of children having next of kin, perfectly able to take them in and they are passed over frequently, and judges regularly passing over any other professionals that families bring into the court and taking the FaCs psychologist and case worker notes, which many people's experiences of them are dishonest or embellished. Someone on here regularly sites how her friend had to give up a lot of financial stability and savings to be awarded custody of her grandchildren. Just from hearing that, why did she have to pay a fortune just to show she is appropriate? Why wasn't it already evident? NC says her, BC and KT paid $4500 to try to fight it out in court. Lots of people have plenty going for them to take on relatives kids but they are overlooked. As a friend of mine said, Family court is a misnomer and it is all about who has the most money is the last one left standing. When a child becomes a foster child, they are worth a lot of money to a great many people and I am not talking about the careers. It has become evident in many countries that the foster system is a form of people trafficking. I don't think BC's or KT's extended family could ever have provided the type of life that the FF could, but then most families can't. I get a little tired of hearing all these assumptions about the FF based on absolutely nothing except what people project onto them. I've heard on here a lot that it was so wonderful that they opened their home to these 2 children who needed it. Maybe it met the needs of the FF to have an instant family, two children that they had from almost babies that they could raise as their own, call their own name and treat as closely as possible as if they had them biologically themselves. I have questions about where LT was before her brother was also removed and then the 2 of them placed together, and now here is the question I think I will get yelled at the most about but I can't hold it in anymore, were they earmarked for this couple all along? MOO

There are also millions of stories about struggling grandparents selflessly bringing up their grandchildren.

Perhaps the poster on here (TGY? Someone else?) can tell us why her friend had such a hard time. Was the child's parent resistant to his/her mother taking care of the child? So she had to legally prove herself. That she wasn't too old, too busy, too whatever.

I know that is why Chloe Valentine's grandmother couldn't get temp custody of Chloe through FACS SA. The daughter (Chloe's mum) resisted it heavily, for no apparent reason except for spite, in her case. And she wanted the $$$ herself for Chloe's care.

.

 

[frogwell]

Was this when Fehon was in charge or when Jubelin took over? Im guessing the latter. I'm starting to have a lot of concerns as to how this investigation was run in the very early stages. Why does Fehon completely deny abduction yet that is the first thing FM and Partridge felt? What reason is there to keep an abduction quiet?

It has never been reported Partridge thought he was abducted.

 

[SouthAussie]

It has never been reported Partridge thought he was abducted.

I posted a link earlier for you and everyone else, speaking of how Fehon tried to word things delicately - for the parents sake - and referred to it as human intervention, instead of abduction.

 

[purpleandgreen]

:goodpost:

I'm sure the court documents would be correct
.

Your memory isn't that bad. It was discussed, somehow I was under the impression that he was taken 'while' he was in foster care. (Those links are now impossible to find) :tantrum:

Firstly, congratulations on the mutli quote

Secondly, what about this? Was this when William had been hidden before? And did Daryl Clifford know he was hiding William, if it was?


William's grandmother, Natalie Collins, earlier said she was in a relationship with Daryl, from Quakers Hill in Sydney's west, in the 1980s.

But their relationship fell apart. Afterward, Daryl met his long time wife Karen, and the pair had Michael in 1995.

Ms Collins claimed the Clifford family briefly gave William and his biological parents a place to stay when he was a baby.

'William lived with Daryl and Karen and Michael for a few months when he was a baby,' she said.

'They took Karlie and Brendan in to live with them'.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rrell-s-mother-Karlie-pictured-stays-mum.html

I know we've heard this story before, but some doesn't make sense.

The child the subject of these proceedings – whom I shall call Julian – was one of four siblings. Julian was removed from the care of his mother at 7 months’ age because of concerns that he was at risk of harm

https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/58853ecfe4b058596cba36a9

parents Karlie Tyrrell and Brendan Collins took William at the age of around eight months old and hid him

William Tyrrell was hidden for three months by his biological parents

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/re...e/news-story/bce866bd1bd09f319f5e6bfc71905df6

I believe he was hidden, and if he was 8 months - was he with the FF when he was taken?

Did the court get it wrong? Doubt it.

Another embellished story from NC? Probable.

:thinking:

Well it's either once again poor reporting, The Courts being an exception, or this may have well been when it occurred. IMO

If correct, it would certainly explain the FM's suspicions.

 

[frogwell]

I posted a link earlier for you and everyone else, speaking of how Fehon tried to word things delicately - for the parents sake - and referred to it as human intervention, instead of abduction.

I read it but didn't think it relevant. MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

I read it but didn't think it relevant. MOO

Of course it is relevant. imo

It fully explained why he tiptoed around abduction and/or child sex crime. Why he ragged on the journos for saying that. He was trying to save the parents additional grief and hurt. That article was written 9 days after William went missing.

 

[frogwell]

Well it's either once again poor reporting, The Courts being an exception, or this may have well been when it occurred. IMO

If correct, it would certainly explain the FM's suspicions.

I got the impression from the reporting that to begin with KT, BC and WT were living with DC for the 1st few months of his life ( 4 months), FaCs wanted to take WT and they decided to go into hiding and they were located when WT was 7 months old and removed from them. It may be wrong but if I saw it in a play or a movie or something, this is the part I would be in tears on the ground of the theatre amongst the jaffas. MOO

 

[sleepinoz]

I don't know if that is necessarily true. I don't mean to be controversial but there are plenty of stories on the net of children having next of kin, perfectly able to take them in and they are passed over frequently, and judges regularly passing over any other professionals that families bring into the court and taking the FaCs psychologist and case worker notes, which many people's experiences of them are dishonest or embellished. Someone on here regularly sites how her friend had to give up a lot of financial stability and savings to be awarded custody of her grandchildren. Just from hearing that, why did she have to pay a fortune just to show she is appropriate? Why wasn't it already evident? NC says her, BC and KT paid $4500 to try to fight it out in court. Lots of people have plenty going for them to take on relatives kids but they are overlooked. As a friend of mine said, Family court is a misnomer and it is all about who has the most money is the last one left standing. When a child becomes a foster child, they are worth a lot of money to a great many people and I am not talking about the careers. It has become evident in many countries that the foster system is a form of people trafficking. I don't think BC's or KT's extended family could ever have provided the type of life that the FF could, but then most families can't. I get a little tired of hearing all these assumptions about the FF based on absolutely nothing except what people project onto them. I've heard on here a lot that it was so wonderful that they opened their home to these 2 children who needed it. Maybe it met the needs of the FF to have an instant family, two children that they had from almost babies that they could raise as their own, call their own name and treat as closely as possible as if they had them biologically themselves. I have questions about where LT was before her brother was also removed and then the 2 of them placed together, and now here is the question I think I will get yelled at the most about but I can't hold it in anymore, were they earmarked for this couple all along? MOO

I'm not going to respond to all of your remarks, only a couple.

IMO LT was placed into temporary care prior to William being removed, once William was removed her care status probably became permanent as well. If that was the case FACS would most definitely try to place the children together, which is why they were placed with this FF.

I have heard (consider it a rumor) that this was not their first experience at fostering, if that is true then they had obviously had children in temporary care beforehand.

As for stories of nok being passed over, sometimes the nok are not eligible, they might think they are but they are not. People complain all over the net, you just can't believe everything unless you know them.

 

[Wexford]

It has never been reported Partridge thought he was abducted.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/ne...sh-into-thin-air/story-e6frg6z6-1227308929078

Partridge arrives very early the next day, and already there are people out on *horseback, on bicycle, on foot, searching for *William. His dad is out there with them, and will be for days, thinking, “Surely if he is out here in the bush he’ll be found?”

Arriving at the house on Benaroon Drive, *Partridge is thinking, “Something just doesn’t feel right about this whole thing.”

What didn't feel right to her about the search? What other suggestion is there other than lost? There really is only one.

 

[frogwell]

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/ne...sh-into-thin-air/story-e6frg6z6-1227308929078


What didn't feel right to her about the search? What other suggestion is there other than lost? There really is only one.

I think there is more than one.

 

[they'll get you]

Arrrgh yes sleep.

P: Parents are extra cautious in Sydney, but you’d probably let your guard down and be a bit disarmed in a quiet neck of the woods like that.

https://www.9news.com.au/national/2...full-transcript-from-william-tyrrells-parents
In a 22-minute interview released by NSW Police today,

I wonder if there was a public alert when this happened? There have been a number of these type of bulletins. Is it Cayleys Law?

 

[they'll get you]

Well, whether he gave the DNA voluntarily (informed consent) or upon being served a warrant .....


...... the police officer has to be satisfied that the person is a suspect and that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the forensic procedure could produce evidence relating to this offence.

https://www.sydneycriminallawyers.com.au/blog/how-does-the-national-dna-database-work/

NOT FAIR!
LE don’t need a warrant for a random roadside drug or breath test. Just taser and take I recon.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[they'll get you]

There are also millions of stories about struggling grandparents selflessly bringing up their grandchildren.

Perhaps the poster on here (TGY? Someone else?) can tell us why her friend had such a hard time. Was the child's parent resistant to his/her mother taking care of the child? So she had to legally prove herself. That she wasn't too old, too busy, too whatever.

I know that is why Chloe Valentine's grandmother couldn't get temp custody of Chloe through FACS SA. The daughter (Chloe's mum) resisted it heavily, for no apparent reason except for spite, in her case. And she wanted the $$$ herself for Chloe's care.

.

My GF’s grandchildren were taken from the druggie parents and placed in foster care, similar ages to William & his sister. and the carers wanted to adopt both. My friend had no say, maybe because she is in her 60s. :dunno: The adoption process was being rushed through so she had to fight it in court and she eventually won.

She tells me DOCs we’re an untouchable law in themselves.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[they'll get you]

I posted a link earlier for you and everyone else, speaking of how Fehon tried to word things delicately - for the parents sake - and referred to it as human intervention, instead of abduction.

Very interesting wording and I’m feeling a relevant difference.

Human intervention and abduction.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[they'll get you]

I doubt we’ll ever hear if William is found alive due to all the privacy. We might hear if he is ever found deceased.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[sosocurious]

Was this when Fehon was in charge or when Jubelin took over? Im guessing the latter. I'm starting to have a lot of concerns as to how this investigation was run in the very early stages. Why does Fehon completely deny abduction yet that is the first thing FM and Partridge felt? What reason is there to keep an abduction quiet?

Imo he didn't deny it - I just think they had to go through the whole search process and that was what Fehon was the face of.
this article updated on the 16 Sept 2014.

Superintendent Paul Fehon said it remained unclear whether William, who was last seen wearing a Spider-Man suit, had wandered off of his own accord or whether something more sinister had occurred.
Strike Force Rossann has been formed to investigate the disappearance. It's understood this includes the State Crime Command's Sex Crimes Squad and specially trained investigators who are experienced in the unexplained disappearances of young children.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...missing-william-tyrell-3-20140916-10hfbq.html

 

[Credulious]

NOT FAIR!
LE don’t need a warrant for a random roadside drug or breath test. Just taser and take I recon.

Just wipe the froth from the mouth :goodpost: