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

[Thebottomline]

I watched a true crime programme today. The lead investigator of this particular case was being interviewed and his words “ we know he did it, whe just need to convince a jury” made me think of this case .

 

[SouthAussie]

BBM, Do we really know if BS is still considered a primary POI?
If he is i haven't seen it in any MSM?
Do police normally officially and publicly declare someone is no longer a POI in any given criminal case?

I wouldn't think The Australian would be saying this if it wasn't true. Or that other MSM would be repeating it. Considering the defamation cases that Spedding has running in Supreme Court at the moment ... one of the defamation cases involving The Australian.

So, no, I don't think that Spedding has been cleared. Four years is an awfully long time to remain a primary POI, after such intense investigations by Strike Force Rosann and the secondary strike force. I am sure they would like to exclude him if they could ... or arrest him, if they had enough substantive evidence to satisfy a prosecutor that a court case could be run without reasonable doubt.


"The Australian reported that the first high-profile suspect in the investigation remains “a person of interest” but there are also four other “high priority” suspects being looked at, with an inquest set to begin this year.

Following William’s disappearance, the man was identified as a prime suspect by police after they learned he had been at the home days earlier to quote on a washing machine repair and returned a week later to complete the job."

Police hone in on five suspects relating to William Tyrrell’s disappearance
JUNE 28, 2018

 

[papertrail]

IMO the washing machine repair would of been more for FGM's benefit than the FP's that were only there for a visit.
Didn't it state in MSM that FGM's washing was piling up?
I think the FP's would of taken enough clothing with them for a short stay.

There has been no mention in media or elsewhere re the initial length of stay the ff intended to have at fgm's house.

 

[papertrail]

I watched a true crime programme today. The lead investigator of this particular case was being interviewed and his words “ we know he did it, whe just need to convince a jury” made me think of this case .

How interesting that an investigator thinks he can convince a jury or judge. Was this an Australian case?

 

[Thebottomline]

How interesting that an investigator thinks he can convince a jury or judge. Was this an Australian case?

Perhaps it was the prosecutor, it was the words that stood out to me . And no it was not an Australian case,

 

[Karinna]

There has been no mention in media or elsewhere re the initial length of stay the ff intended to have at fgm's house.

IIRC, It was stated initially in the case they were there for the weekend to help FGM with her move?
Trying to find a link for you, but a lot of the early articles from MSM are no longer available.

 

[Thebottomline]

IIRC, It was stated initially in the case they were there for the weekend to help FGM with her move?
Trying to find a link for you, but a lot of the early articles from MSM are no longer available.

I think I remember visit being for the weekend aswell. Will help search link too.

 

[Karinna]

I think I remember visit being for the weekend aswell. Will help search link too.

Thanks. I'm still looking, but remember discussing it in much earlier threads. Don't worry about it because the fact the FP's stated it was a "visit" means exactly that, just a visit. I doubt it was going to be for too long regardless.

 

[SouthAussie]

I did a search through the threads and I can't find a link there. But every post I looked at in the search, by many different posters, said that they were to be at grandma's house for the weekend. We must have heard that from somewhere.

Not sure if it was in a video or a presser or an article. I am trying to remember way back to the start when there was a person speaking for the foster parents and Fehon was running the search. It could have been as far back as that.

 

[Karinna]

I did a search through the threads and I can't find a link there. But every post I looked at in the search, by many different posters, said that they were to be at grandma's house for the weekend. We must have heard that from somewhere.

Not sure if it was in a video or a presser or an article. I am trying to remember way back to the start when there was a person speaking for the foster parents and Fehon was running the search. It could have been as far back as that.

Thanks SA, that's what i remember from way back as well in the discussions. Didn't think i was dreaming LOL.

 

[Blues Clues]

Actually, with all due respect, it wasn't a surprise visit. She knew they were coming. She was just expecting them to arrive the next morning, rather than the night before. Link coming - help would be appreciated!



Edited to add - can only find this atm: WS thread # 10 - SA's post #16, point No 2.

Also: New twist in missing William case

ONLY days before William Tyrrell was abducted, his grandmother told repairman Bill Spedding she was expecting a stay-over visit from her family and could he fix her faulty washing machine.

BBM

AFAIR it has never been written or said they were arriving the next morning, only they were arriving the next day.

 

[papertrail]

Re how long ff intended Kendall visit to last. FM stated on 60 mins they visited due to fgm's recent ill health.

I have seen no other reference that stated exactly how long. I have been with this case from the begining.

 

[papertrail]

BBM

AFAIR it has never been written or said they were arriving the next morning, only they were arriving the next day.

Correct and and we have no idea if prior arrangement was to arrive during the day or as ff did on Thursday straight after preschool and or child minding centre pickup arriving Kendall early evening.

Someone obviously knew their plans.

 

[papertrail]

Thanks. I'm still looking, but remember discussing it in much earlier threads. Don't worry about it because the fact the FP's stated it was a "visit" means exactly that, just a visit. I doubt it was going to be for too long regardless.

How long is a piece of string Karinna?

 

[papertrail]

Perhaps it was the prosecutor, it was the words that stood out to me . And no it was not an Australian case,

Thank goodness! police talking like you inferred shouldnt be near a prosecution.

 

[Thebottomline]

Correct and and we have no idea if prior arrangement was to arrive during the day or as ff did on Thursday straight after preschool and or child minding centre pickup arriving Kendall early evening.

Someone obviously knew their plans.

 

[Thebottomline]

Thank goodness! police talking like you inferred shouldnt be near a prosecution.

That wasn’t the point of my post papertrail , it was the words as I stated before.

 

[Karinna]

How long is a piece of string Karinna?

Could you re phrase that question please. Not sure what you are talking about?

 

[SouthAussie]

I was looking at times of day that children were abducted, or abductions were attempted – because I thought that 10:30am on a Friday might be an unusual time.

Then I realized that anytime during the day is not an unusual time, as daytime is when children are out and about and predators/voyeurs may be on the prowl. Children have gone missing early in the morning on their way to school, and others have gone missing while playing in playgrounds, some have been taken from their homes, some from their beds.

There was a huge spate of attempted abductions (13 incidents in 35 days) in NSW in 2017. All of them in broad daylight, it seems. Several of these incidents involved very young children … 15 months old, 3 years old, 5 years old. At least 5 of the children involved in the 13 incidents were young boys.

These stranger-predators are NOT afraid to take big risks.


There's been a spate of attempted child abductions across NSW -- here's what you need to know

Australia’s Most Mysterious Missing Children’s Cases

 

[SouthAussie]

That wasn’t the point of my post papertrail , it was the words as I stated before.

I don't think it matters who said those words “ we know he did it, we just need to convince a jury”, either the investigator or the prosecutor.
Of course an investigator needs enough evidence to be able to convince a jury that the known perpetrator is guilty. They know that they can't hand a flimsy case over to a prosecutor, and a prosecutor will not accept a flimsy case.

The investigators and the prosecutor work together when amassing/compiling enough evidence to convince a jury.

I was reading yesterday about 'hold out' jurors, and the push to allow majority decisions - as opposed to unanimous decisions - of jurors. Sufficient and good, strong evidence is necessary ... even when the perpetrator is 'known' to have committed the crime.
There is no room for reasonable doubt, that a good defence lawyer can often easily create, in a trial.

Majority report