Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #45

[mussopossum]

Ah here we go...
Spedding wants $1m

A washing machine repairman whose name became linked to William Tyrrell’sdisappearance will seek a minimum $1 million in compensation from NSW police. WilliamHarrie Spedding, 65, will file a suit for misfeasance in public office, including collateral abuse of process, and ...

The irony it is $1million.

Paywalled article. Im sure other MSM will pick this up today
NoCookies | The Australian

 

[sosocurious]

Police reinvestigated allegations made against him in the 1980s, and had him charged with historical child sex offences. All were dismissed or dropped, with costs awarded in his favour, uncommon in criminal proceedings.
His legal team says the charges were laid not because police believed Mr Spedding was guilty of the historical offences but to put pressure on him, and his 30-year marriage to his wife, Margaret.

Defence lawyer Peter O’Brien was this month forced to gather the evidence that clearly ruled Mr Spedding out, despite it being available to police for years.
“I’m not suggesting for a moment police shouldn’t have looked at my client,” he said. “But it would, or should, have been fairly evident fairly quickly there wasn’t anything in it.”

NoCookies | The Australian
William Tyrrell disappearance: Spedding wants $1m from police

 

[Deleted member 161976]

"He said William was unrestrained, had his hands to the glass and was peering out."
"Asked about the boy’s age, he said: “I would say three or four. He was standing. He wasn’t crying."

If a 3 year old who was in an unfamiliar place was snatched off the street and thrown in a car with that car speeding off driving erratically and possibly making him fall over or hurt himself in the car, If that 3-year-old did not know that driver or had not met that driver don't you think that he would be hysterical and would be screaming or look distressed or crying?

Instead, he was just peering out the window as they drove and not crying. I feel like this leads me to believe that he may have known or previously met his abductor.


"“It was a woman (driver). She was almost off the tar. In the back seat was a young boy with his hands up on the window … his face was sort of in between.”"

"What does "His face was sort of in-between mean?"
His face was in between his hands? as In he was looking out like we do when it is glairy and cup our hands to try and look a bit better?

"“(The driver) was a woman in her late 20s to late 30s, blonde hair, very fair complexion. She wore a white, short-sleeved blouse.”"

I wonder if he was shown photos of Williams BM at the time or anyone within Williams circle to rule them out, not insinuating here its been advised his family is clear so I just wonder if this may have been a part of clearing them back then? Surely he would have been shown a photo?


NoCookies | The Australian

BBM I don't think BM has a fair complexion, quite sallow IMO.

 

[drsleuth]

I wonder if MS was represented.

I have been looking through MSM articles to see if she was represented. I hope so. Otherwise it could possibly be seen as inappropriate for Peter O'Brien to be consulting with her witness husband and herself, another witness. imo

That is, if Peter O'Brien and/or his staff consulted with Spedding in her presence.

Both Margaret & Bill were represented by Peter O'Brien, the coroner obviously had no problem with that.

 

[SouthAussie]

Both Margaret & Bill were represented by Peter O'Brien, the coroner obviously had no problem with that.

Hmmm .... maybe she should have. imo

I wonder if anyone else had a problem with it? FP barrister, for example.
Perhaps someone else asked for the withdrawal.

I see no reason for O'Brien to withdraw from the inquest, otherwise.
If Spedding is no longer needed at the inquest, O'Brien just doesn't show up any more.
And now that I see Spedding is suing the police, it seems that his relationship with O'Brien likely is not otherwise terminated.

In withdrawing from the inquest, O'Brien has opened the door to Spedding getting/needing other representation if he is called back to the inquest for any reason, in the future.

Having said that, with Spedding now suing the police, I think it is very likely that O'Brien was asked to withdraw from the inquest - or withdrew himself before he was asked - as it may be a huge conflict of interest if he is sitting in the inquest courtroom and potentially asking questions of the witnesses, questions that could relate to Spedding's lawsuit (if he hasn't done that already).

 

[drsleuth]

@drsleuth
Thank you for your inquest reports! It's very kind of you to give the rest of us a glimpse into the court room.

Re yesterday: Did Mr Craddock ask the man in the blue car to come forward too, or did he only mention the woman in the fawn 4WD?

Is it normal for a coroner to ask media to publicise something? If it happened before in this inquest, can you remember what else the Coroner wanted published?

No problems stormbird, I encourage anyone to go to court to hear the evidence for yourself if you can. You only hear/ read a fraction of the evidence heard in the MSM.

Mr Craddock only mentioned the lady in the fawn w4d to come forward .

I don't find this unusual thou, the police will use the media for their own benefit when it suits them........

 

[drsleuth]

Why would Jubelin not told FF about this evidence?

I don't know how Caroline can write about people's reactions in court when she wasn't even in the court room.

 

[drsleuth]

Hmmm .... maybe she should have. imo

I wonder if anyone else had a problem with it? FP barrister, for example.
Perhaps someone else asked for the withdrawal.

I see no reason for O'Brien to withdraw from the inquest, otherwise.
If Spedding is no longer needed at the inquest, O'Brien just doesn't show up any more.
And now that I see Spedding is suing the police, it seems that his relationship with O'Brien likely is not otherwise terminated.

In withdrawing from the inquest, O'Brien has opened the door to Spedding getting/needing other representation if he is called back to the inquest for any reason, in the future.

Having said that, with Spedding now suing the police, I think it is very likely that O'Brien was asked to withdraw from the inquest - or withdrew himself before he was asked - as it may be a huge conflict of interest if he is sitting in the inquest courtroom and potentially asking questions of the witnesses, questions that could relate to Spedding's lawsuit (if he hasn't done that already).

I don't think he was asked to withdraw IMO

Just when he heard ( like many ) in court the other day that the inquest had been adjourned, he just didn't think he was needed there anymore . The coroner did say he could still be involved if a need arose & that he would be notified if needed.

All along he was pushing for the inquest to investigate to police investigation, he made an application for just that, which was rejected with the coroner saying at this stage of the inquest her focus has to be on finding out what happened to William, she said an investigation into the police may need to be investigated at a later stage from memory

 

[SouthAussie]

I don't think he was asked to withdraw IMO

Just when he heard ( like many ) in court the other day that the inquest had been adjourned, he just didn't think he was needed there anymore . The coroner did say he could still be involved if a need arose & that he would be notified if needed.

All along he was pushing for the inquest to investigate to police investigation, he made an application for just that, which was rejected with the coroner saying at this stage of the inquest her focus has to be on finding out what happened to William, she said an investigation into the police may need to be investigated at a later stage from memory

BBM: I wonder if her opinion on that may now change, with a lawsuit having been announced. Or does she still allow him to un-withdraw and gather info for a lawsuit? Though, I guess maybe others have sued other entities based on the potential wrong doings unearthed at an inquest.

Interesting.

 

[drsleuth]

BBM: I wonder if her opinion on that may now change, with a lawsuit having been announced. Or does she still allow him to un-withdraw and gather info for a lawsuit? Though, I guess maybe others have sued other entities based on the potential wrong doings unearthed at an inquest.

Interesting.

I think it's been well known at the inquest that Mr O'brien is very interested in the police investigation & the coroner would have been aware of a pending lawsuit IMO

After Mr Chapman gave his evidence, when the coroner went around the Bar table for any x examination, Mr O'Brien asked if he could ask some questions about the investigation. The following conversation ocurred..........

Coroner : Mr O'Brien, if you've got any questions , you ask them, someone will object I'm sure if need be.......

He said to Mr Chapman I want to ask you some questions about the police investigation.

He than went on to ask him questions about the police investigation, when the police first spoke to him, who it was, where they were from, the timing of statements, interview's & when he signed his statement etc.

I must say Mr O'Brien is very good at his job ................

 

[SouthAussie]

I must say Mr O'Brien is very good at his job ................

I'll keep that in mind if I ever want to sue the police or the media

 

[drsleuth]

I'll keep that in mind if I ever want to sue the police or the media

I hope you never have the need

 

[SouthAussie]

Defence lawyer Peter O’Brien was this month forced to gather the evidence that clearly ruled Mr Spedding out, despite it being available to police for years.
“I’m not suggesting for a moment police shouldn’t have looked at my client,” he said. “But it would, or should, have been fairly evident fairly quickly there wasn’t anything in it.”

NoCookies | The Australian
William Tyrrell disappearance: Spedding wants $1m from police

I hope that Mr O'Brien never has a missing person within his family.

 

[madoodi]

Just want to brainstorm:
Any ideas who this mystery woman in the 4wd could be?

• Someone from FACS?
• BGM or someone connected to her?
• Caravan lady?
• Complete random abductor?
• Someone completely unrelated - a domestic dispute?

If connected to William's abduction:

• Who knew he was going to be at FGM?
• Where could they have taken him?

JMO

 

[Violet77]

In regards to why BS was called to testify at the inquest - IMO it was solely to cover all bases, to take the Coroner step by step through how the whole story has played out (not the ins & outs of the investigation obviously) also, imagine everyone’s reaction had he not been called.
I was set on BS for a long time, thanks to media

 

[SouthAussie]

• Who knew he was going to be at FGM?

Would it have to be a planned event? If this sighting is in any way connected.

 

[drsleuth]

Just want to brainstorm:
Any ideas who this mystery woman in the 4wd could be?

• Someone from FACS?
• BGM or someone connected to her?
• Caravan lady?
• Complete random abductor?
• Someone completely unrelated - a domestic dispute?

If connected to William's abduction:

• Who knew he was going to be at FGM?
• Where could they have taken him?

JMO

BBM, I don't think she has a license.................could explain the erratic driving thou .....

 

[madoodi]

Would it have to be a planned event? If this sighting is in any way connected.

No, does not have to be planned, but of course if planned, they would have had to have known William's whereabouts.
IMO

 

[madoodi]

BBM, I don't think she has a license.................could explain the erratic driving thou .....

Hmmmm...
Am I correct that of the bio family only the BM and BD have been cleared?
IMO

 

[Violet77]

As far as people not understanding why someone would speed & draw attention to themselves if they had just snatched a child - well really, how far ahead are these people thinking anyway! I don’t think we can assume on the mindset of someone willing to snatch a child would be one to think rationally & clearly.

If it was a planned abduction - which I don’t think can be ruled out now after all the craziness of the inquest - I can imagine a situation where both children were the targets, William just happened to be the easier target, maybe he was taken & the perps waited close by with him for an opportunity to grab the second child, not thinking how quickly the neighbors could ban together searching the whole area & calling out for William, this could account for the time delay in William disappearing & the cars seen driving in what could have been a spooked manner - spooked by how quickly people where searching for him.

Caroline said something in her podcast for William that made my ears prick up, the fact that the family could have been watched & the plan was to take the children as they slept, but was interrupted by the children each sleeping alongside a parent.