Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #37

[iailwa]

Thankyou JLZ. Is does seem it’s the coroner who decides in the end and not the general population if I’m correct.

True. But this can/could be swayed by public interest. I hope so, in the future. Much of JLZ posted above is paramount to public interest. I think it will be something that evolves over time but just IMO

 

[Freddo Frog]

You know, something strikes me about an inquest. William’s BM, Karlie, gave an interview to the ‘Sunday Night’ program on Channel 7 earlier this year:

YouTube

As far as I can remember, Karlie did not mention an inquest, she did not call for one; nor demand one be held. I can only take this to mean that she is happy with the handling of the matter by the NSW Coroner and SFR.

I would presume that she would be briefed on happenings through SFR, though, despite her personal brushes with the law. As William's biological mother, even though she didn't have custody, one would expect that courtesy would be extended to her. Maybe she is just happy with the way things are going in respect to her own involvement with William?

 

[Bohemian]

Just in case people are not familiar with the role and powers of the NSW Coroner:

‘Coroners investigate certain kinds of deaths in order to determine the identity of the deceased and the date, place, circumstances and medical cause of death.’

‘In short, the Coroner’s role is to find out what happened, not to point the finger or lay blame.’

‘In some cases, inquests are held and witnesses are called to give evidence of their knowledge of the circumstances of the case under investigation.’

‘Following an inquest, coroners may make recommendations to governments and other agencies with a view to improving public health and safety. The Coroner has no power to enforce compliance with such recommendations. It is a matter for the relevant government minister(s) or agencies to determine whether a Coroner’s recommendations should be adopted.’

‘The Coroner cannot find someone guilty of a crime. If, at any time during the course of an inquest or inquiry, the Coroner forms an opinion that a known person has committed an indictable offence in connection with the death the Coroner is required to suspend the inquest or inquiry and refer the matter to the Director of Public Prosecutions. It is entirely a matter for the Director of Public Prosecutions to determine whether charges should be laid against the person, and a matter for the criminal courts to determine whether the person is guilty.’

There are a few others:

The Coroner's role

 

[JLZ]

Thankyou JLZ. Is does seem it’s the coroner who decides in the end and not the general population if I’m correct.

I agree that the final decision about whether or when to hold an inquest is not the public's domain. That does not make it inappropriate for members of the public to petition, argue, press their view. However the point I am engaging with is whether anyone apart from the family and friends of the deceased has a stake, a legitimate interest, in coronial proceedings, and I would argue that they do or may do.

 

[Thebottomline]

I agree that the final decision about whether or when to hold an inquest is not the public's domain. That does not make it inappropriate for members of the public to petition, argue, press their view. However the point I am engaging with is whether anyone apart from the family and friends of the deceased has a stake, a legitimate interest, in coronial proceedings, and I would argue that they do or may do.

Yes I see what you mean and it makes sense.

 

[iailwa]

I would presume that she would be briefed on happenings through SFR, though, despite her personal brushes with the law. As William's biological mother, even though she didn't have custody, one would expect that courtesy would be extended to her. Maybe she is just happy with the way things are going in respect to her own involvement with William?

Hopefully she was briefed but you never know... maybe the relationship is strained? Just an idea. You'd think SFR would be communicating with her, but sometimes things get a bit lost in translation for want of a better cliche... could there be animosity? Again JMO. i just don't think things have gone down well for her and the police, and of course, she is no longer WTs carer, there may be some bitterness that hinders the whole communication process. She could be even be outta the loop, or choose to be. This is a silly post i know

 

[Bohemian]

I agree that the final decision about whether or when to hold an inquest is not the public's domain. That does not make it inappropriate for members of the public to petition, argue, press their view. However the point I am engaging with is whether anyone apart from the family and friends of the deceased has a stake, a legitimate interest, in coronial proceedings, and I would argue that they do or may do.

I can see your point, JLZ. I would say people do have the right to petition the Coroner. But does the Coroner have to cede to their demands? Under the law; no. But, I agree, in certain circumstances, the public may have a legitimate stake in a Coroner’s inquiry. For instance, in matters of public safety, ie; fires and explosions.

 

[Karinna]

Here is a link to an in depth guide of Coronial services for a missing person in the state of NSW.
From what i read it is for family & friends of missing people, and doesn't state about the general public from what i have read so far.
A guide to coronial services in NSW
for families and friends of missing people
http://www.coroners.justice.nsw.gov...or families and friends of missing people.pdf

 

[sosocurious]

The thing that was under question was requests by the general public for an inquest. And that is the specific question that I was trying to find an answer for - for soso.

The Grenfell Tower petition/request, and another request about 20 deceased Chinese persons in the UK (very grisly scenario), were the only ones I could find. I could not find an Aussie example. And I could not find any example of a public request for an inquest about someone else’s missing family member.

If anyone else wants to try to find an Aussie public petition for an inquest involving a missing person - other than William - please feel free.

(I am fairly in tune with the Coronial Act. We researched this quite a bit in the Gary Tweddle case in NSW.)

Thanks SA.
That is exactly what I was asking.
Has there been another occasion in Australia where a person or internet group have started and hand delivered a petition that demanded an immediate inquest be held in regard to a missing person? One that not only demanded an immediate inquest but, also requested a lead investigator be booted?
Would that last request even be up to the coroner?

 

[frogwell]

I would imagine that there has to be a period of time when a person is missing, where there is no clue as to a sign of life, for an inquest to be able to be undertaken. Obviously WT is missing and a child of 3 on their own could not survive, but I'm wondering what else would have to be eliminated off an investigation list to find no sign of life. The idea of knowing WT must be alive in a location somewhere with police waiting to swoop when it is not dangerous for the victim, would obviouslt get in the way of an inquest proceeding.

 

[Thebottomline]

My belief is that detective Jubelin and his team are very sure of who took William and what the outcome of that may have been (with exception of course of his remains. I’m sorry to sound crass) Prehaps they are on a timeline to find that circle to dot that i . Yes it’s been 4 harrowing years but maybe they are very close to the evidence an and arrest. Fingers crossed.

 

[Karinna]

(quote)
Knowing that the Coroner has assumed jurisdiction can be a difficult and confusing time. For some families
there may be a feeling of relief that some clarification may come from having the Coroner examine all the
available information, for others it may feel too soon or inappropriate when the person has not been found.
Receiving the news that the Coroner is investigating a suspected death can be distressing, and may feel like
a decision has already been made. It is important to understand that when the Coroner assumes jurisdiction,
this does not automatically mean that a finding of death will be made.

 

[Bohemian]

I would presume that she would be briefed on happenings through SFR, though, despite her personal brushes with the law. As William's biological mother, even though she didn't have custody, one would expect that courtesy would be extended to her. Maybe she is just happy with the way things are going in respect to her own involvement with William?

I think that’s a safe assumption, Freddo, given that Karlie hasn’t said anything to the contrary; publicly at least.

 

[Truthsleuth99]

I agree with you. I believe the SF know exactly who is responsible. Have known for some time. I believe they have slowly and methodically been gathering evidence all this time. I imagine they would have overwhelming circumstantial evidence. That’s not enough Gj
wants to secure a conviction.
I’m confident there will be an arrest.
next Tatic will be to pressure BS wife - who is critical to his alibi. This could be with the prospect of a lengthy jail term ? If she ends up perjurying herself in the inquest.
That’s if it gets to an inquest - I believe GJ is two steps ahead. It won’t be long now.

My belief is that detective Jubelin and his team are very sure of who took William and what the outcome of that may have been (with exception of course of his remains. I’m sorry to sound crass) Prehaps they are on a timeline to find that circle to dot that i . Yes it’s been 4 harrowing years but maybe they are very close to the evidence an and arrest. Fingers crossed.

agree

 

[Thebottomline]

I agree with you. I believe the SF know exactly who is responsible. Have known for some time. I believe they have slowly and methodically been gathering evidence all this time. I imagine they would have overwhelming circumstantial evidence. That’s not enough Gj
wants to secure a conviction.
I’m confident there will be an arrest.
next Tatic will be to pressure BS wife - who is critical to his alibi. This could be with the prospect of a lengthy jail term ? If she ends up perjurying herself in the inquest.
That’s if it gets to an inquest - I believe GJ is two steps ahead. It won’t be long now.

agree

Yes thanks, I was going to mention circumstantial evidence vs rock solid proof.

 

[sosocurious]

I agree.
The case was officially referred to the coroner as a suspected death, back on the 30 January 2015. Opened in the February.

The strike force, codenamed Rosann, would normally be expected to exhaust its inquiries before submitting a brief of evidence for Mr Barnes to then formally consider whether an inquest should be held.

Any such decision by the coroner would typically be made after consultation with the homicide squad detectives leading the investigation, as well as William’s family.

Nocookies
Daniel Morcombe coroner has file on William Tyrrell case

There is not a lot that is typical about this case, however...imo

I know the Morcombe's called for the coronial inquest in July 2009. Does anyone remember when the case was officially referred to the coroner as a suspected death?

 

[Thebottomline]

I agree.
The case was officially referred to the coroner as a suspected death, back on the 30 January 2015. Opened in the February.

The strike force, codenamed Rosann, would normally be expected to exhaust its inquiries before submitting a brief of evidence for Mr Barnes to then formally consider whether an inquest should be held.

Any such decision by the coroner would typically be made after consultation with the homicide squad detectives leading the investigation, as well as William’s family.

Nocookies
Daniel Morcombe coroner has file on William Tyrrell case

There is not a lot that is typical about this case, however...imo

I know the Morcombe's called for the coronial inquest in July 2009. Does anyone remember when the case was officially referred to the coroner as a suspected death?

April 2010 I believe

 

[Bohemian]

I agree.
The case was officially referred to the coroner as a suspected death, back on the 30 January 2015. Opened in the February.

The strike force, codenamed Rosann, would normally be expected to exhaust its inquiries before submitting a brief of evidence for Mr Barnes to then formally consider whether an inquest should be held.

Any such decision by the coroner would typically be made after consultation with the homicide squad detectives leading the investigation, as well as William’s family.

Nocookies
Daniel Morcombe coroner has file on William Tyrrell case

There is not a lot that is typical about this case, however...imo

I know the Morcombe's called for the coronial inquest in July 2009. Does anyone remember when the case was officially referred to the coroner as a suspected death?

Is this what you’re looking for, soso?

April, 2010:
The State Coroner receives an extensive investigation report, containing thousands of pages, from police regarding the suspected death.

Timeline: Daniel Morcombe case - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

 

[sosocurious]

Is this what you’re looking for?

April, 2010:
The State Coroner receives an extensive investigation report, containing thousands of pages, from police regarding the suspected death.


Timeline: Daniel Morcombe case - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)

Geez, it certainly did take a long time for the referral.
At least William's case was referred promptly.

 

[Bohemian]

Geez, it certainly did take a long time for the referral.
At least William's case was referred promptly.

Yes, only a little over 4 months from the time William went missing until his case was referred to the State Coroner. (Over 6 years for Daniel’s case.)