Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #38

[sleepinoz]

Article's have been quoted that say both - most of them say "before" one says "after" - it's up to each member to decide which to believe.

 

[papertrail]

I can’t find any link supporting this. Maybe I’m missing something , the only information I can find is that they had coffee date before assembly in numerous news articles , regardless though it’s irelevent if it can’t be vouched for him actually being there , also if as a poster said it was after a 9am assembly it would still not clear him in that time frame IMO

When the link was posted a contributor said no one had ever noticed the particular wording before referring to AFTERWARDS. I am not going to continue this discussion.

 

[JLZ]

I believe they are two separate things.

1. You apply for (seek) s57 leave if you want to attend an inquest and ask questions (only for persons deemed by the Coroner to have 'sufficient interest').
2. Or you are summoned (subpeonaed) because the Coroner requires you there ... your lawyer is entitled to ask questions.
3. Otherwise you are family and are entitled to attend .. and ask questions.

Yes they're separate things, but not mutually exclusive as far as I know. If someone's a POI, it seems to me they have a substantial interest in what comes out of the inquest.

 

[sleepinoz]

They were not extraordinary statements by any stretch of the imagination. To the point and focused just like a legal would advise.

Have you read his statement? I'd like to see that can you please link it.

 

[they'll get you]

I can’t find any link supporting this. Maybe I’m missing something , the only information I can find is that they had coffee date before assembly in numerous news articles , regardless though it’s irelevent if it can’t be vouched for him actually being there , also if as a poster said it was after a 9am assembly it would still not clear him in that time frame IMO

It was posted cause Ol’ Col told me so, he’s straight as a gun-barrel kind of a guy.

 

[Thebottomline]

Because every person is innocent until convicted that's why. Walk a mile in their shoes. This terrible crime is way too perfect with the ease to point investigators to Spedding. Its a setup scenario.

Papertrail can you elaborate , you seem to be here to dispute anything said against spedding . It would be welcome to hear why you feel this way. You obviously have reason to feel this way and that’s fair but if you could say in some way why you’re so adamant of his innocence it may help some of us to understand your posts more . This is a forum about a missing little 3 year old boy

 

[Thebottomline]

When the link was posted a contributor said no one had ever noticed the particular wording before referring to AFTERWARDS. I am not going to continue this discussion.

Ok that’s fine

 

[they'll get you]

Crikey a set up?
Well this person who can’t be named better be named to the cops pronto!
Gimmi his/her name and I’ll bloody well do it now.

I’m serious if anyone is withholding knowledge or information regarding little William I’ll be the first to dob.
If you know something bloody well do something!!

NOW!!

 

[Thebottomline]

I’m serious if anyone is withholding knowledge or information regarding little William I’ll be the first to dob.
If you know something bloody well do something!!

NOW!!

Maybe it’s all in the colour of the neck tie

 

[they'll get you]

Have you read his statement? I'd like to see that can you please link it.

I’d like to see it as well.
Surely it only privy to insiders.

 

[they'll get you]

 

[SouthAussie]

Yes they're separate things, but not mutually exclusive as far as I know. If someone's a POI, it seems to me they have a substantial interest in what comes out of the inquest.

Yes, upon further review, I can see Spedding's lawyer requesting s57 leave also if he wants copies of the witness statements.
Desirable if a lawyer wants to prepare their client for the stand.

However, I believe the Coroner can refuse s57 leave if she feels it will interfere with the process. The reference that I find for that is that the Coroner can refuse s57 leave to a relative in exceptional circumstances ... I can't find anything about a POIs request for s57 at all.


All those who have been given interested person status will be provided with reports of the witnesses whose evidence is to be used in the inquest.
Attending a coroner's inquest - The MDU

 

[purpleandgreen]

And no one has any idea what the inconsistencies were, if indeed there were any.

But I suspect we’re about to find out- in about another 6-8 weeks.

 

[purpleandgreen]

Because every person is innocent until convicted that's why. Walk a mile in their shoes. This terrible crime is way too perfect with the ease to point investigators to Spedding. Its a setup scenario.

Perhaps I don’t want my shoes to have anything to do with someone suspected of child abuse .

Perhaps I don’t want my shoes to be associated with someone who’s a poi in child abduction. Perhaps I don’t want my shoes associated with someone who’s under house has been dug up by law enforcement.

I could go on......

Why do you think it’s a set up? And who do you think set it up? And just as a matter of interest that would certainly clarify a few things- are you related to Spedding or his very extended family?

And if not, how about walking a mile in the shoes of William’s families? They’re all victims here as well as poor little William. They have my deepest sympathy and empathy.

 

[purpleandgreen]

They were not extraordinary statements by any stretch of the imagination. To the point and focused just like a legal would advise.

But you seemed to think they were.

 

[purpleandgreen]

And no one has any idea what the inconsistencies were, if indeed there were any.

You’d have to ask the police about that. They’re the people who alleged that there were inconsistencies. As per the link you replied to.

 

[Thebottomline]

It’s late I know for all us here in Aus, but a question I have which I’m sure has been covered . Was BS former brother in law Hillsley (one of our countries most terrible paedophiles) convicted of Some of his crimes before BS became acquainted with him ?

 

[Thebottomline]

Perhaps I don’t want my shoes to have anything to do with someone suspected of child abuse .

Perhaps I don’t want my shoes to be associated with someone who’s a poi in child abduction. Perhaps I don’t want my shoes associated with someone who’s under house has been dug up by law enforcement.

I could go on......

Why do you think it’s a set up? And who do you think set it up? And just as a matter of interest that would certainly clarify a few things- are you related to Spedding or his very extended family?

And if not, how about walking a mile in the shoes of William’s families? They’re all victims here as well as poor little William. They have my deepest sympathy and empathy.

Set up by whom papertrail ? I’ve gone back in the threads today from along time ago and I have this from you- suspicion about the photo of William on the balcony. A suspicion he was in a sceptic tank that police didn’t search properly. Suspicion of the bowraville person being involved. Suspicion on the colour of Jubelins neck tie . What actually is it because you’re very quick to shoot us all down with our opinions but yours seem to be very broad ?

 

[SouthAussie]

It’s late I know for all us here in Aus, but a question I have which I’m sure has been covered . Was BS former brother in law Hillsley (one of our countries most terrible paedophiles) convicted of Some of his crimes before BS became acquainted with him ?

I dont know if Hillsley's crimes were before he knew Spedding. But he was convicted of crimes before the rape of the two little girls where Spedding was charged. Police say that Hillsley was in jail when the two little girls were raped.

 

[sosocurious]

It was posted cause Ol’ Col told me so, he’s straight as a gun-barrel kind of a guy.

The kind of guy that believes what he says and says what he believe. When are these fireworks he predicted, going to go off?