Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #47

[SLouTh]

Spedding is suing for malicious prosecution, malfeasance and abuse of process.

Hi Cleaver... (love your name by the way... makes me laugh.. loved the show!!)
His legal team must feel that they have a pretty strong case to be going ahead with it ..... would you agree with that??

 

[JWSleuth]

Spedding is suing for malicious prosecution, malfeasance and abuse of process.

Thanks CG.

Hi JWS,
Do you have a link for the family members saying it was fair to look into him? .... I have missed that along the way somewhere..., just interested to read it.....

Hi JWS,
Do you have a link for the family members saying it was fair to look into him? .... I have missed that along the way somewhere..., just interested to read it.....

I do! Let me find the article now....

 

[SouthAussie]

Sure is!

Really? Am I looking at different testimonies? IMO

I find it so strange that people consider this airtight, respectfully.

Again I'm not implying anything and I don't think BS is guilty. But... the alibi is very sketchy- I would not feel comfortable/safe if was mine. IMO.

BBM: I find it strange as well. If this was my child who was missing, I would not have him or any of the POIs off the hook yet.

The inquest is not over. The findings are not in. And even when they are in, if it is an open finding no-one is off the hook.
And if it is a finding that William was taken by persons unknown, no-one is off the hook then either.

I also find it odd that some people say 'the media says he is a former POI'.
While those same people said before 'the media say he is still a POI, but I haven't heard the police say that'.

 

[Cleaver Greene]

Sorry for the earlier truncated post. Still trying to get the hang of quoting earlier posts.

 

[JWSleuth]

Spedding is suing for malicious prosecution, malfeasance and abuse of process. The malicious prosecution can only relate to charges that Spedding was actually prosecuted for. I assume that he is claiming that he was prosecuted over the historic offences for an improper purpose, likely to justify the searches and remanding him in custody. The malfeasance and abuse of process could relate either to the Tyrrell investigation or the investigation and prosecution of historic cases. That is, using historical charges to be able to do things (like detain him for prolonged questioning, listening devices etc) that police could not do if he was just a POI. I don’t know whether that’s what happened; I’m just giving examples of what malfeasance/abuse of process could be in this scenario.

I can’t imagine a lawyer representing a client in a lawsuit like this unless they were cleared in the Tyrrell investigation. It would completely undermine his case if these proceedings were issued and he was then charged with involvement in the Tyrrell case.

If I was defending Spedding and he was still a POI, I would be sitting through the whole inquest to hear the evidence against the other POIs to use at trial. The fact that his lawyer withdrew from the inquest suggests that Spedding is no longer a POI. Peter O’Brien is a very competent lawyer. He would be giving VERY good advice to Spedding.

Thanks for your insights CG!. ok well that could make more sense in respect of the avenue taken.

 

[Cleaver Greene]

Hi Cleaver... (love your name by the way... makes me laugh.. loved the show!!)
His legal team must feel that they have a pretty strong case to be going ahead with it ..... would you agree with that??

Yep. If he loses, he would have to pay not only his costs, but NSWPOL costs too. No competent lawyer would take it on unless the client either had very deep pockets or a very good claim.

 

[SouthAussie]

Yep. If he loses, he would have to pay not only his costs, but NSWPOL costs too. No competent lawyer would take it on unless the client either had very deep pockets or a very good claim.

Has the case been allowed by the Supreme Court yet?

I believe there is a period of consideration prior to bringing a case before the court for judgement?

Just wondering how many claims are denied from further action by the Supreme Court. There does not appear to be any statistics out there, from what I can see.

 

[Cleaver Greene]

Hi Cleaver... (love your name by the way... makes me laugh.. loved the show!!)
His legal team must feel that they have a pretty strong case to be going ahead with it ..... would you agree with that??

Thanks! Most realistic legal TV show I’ve ever seen.

 

[Cleaver Greene]

Has the case been allowed by the Supreme Court yet?

I’m not sure what you mean. Cases don’t get “allowed” by courts. One party files a claim, the other party files a defence and there is then argument about all sorts of things such as whether the case has been properly pleaded or defended. A timetable will be given so that the issues are properly set out and defined. There will be settlement conferences, mediations etc and if the case doesn’t resolve it will eventually go to trial.

 

[SouthAussie]

I’m not sure what you mean. Cases don’t get “allowed” by courts. One party files a claim, the other party files a defence and there is then argument about all sorts of things such as whether the case has been properly pleaded or defended. A timetable will be given so that the issues are properly set out and defined. There will be settlement conferences, mediations etc and if the case doesn’t resolve it will eventually go to trial.

What I meant is do all claims go before the court for judgement on the articles set out in the claim?
Or do some claims get pushed back as not allowable, for whatever reason.
But I think you have answered my question. Thanks.

(Sorry, I must have edited my previous post after you responded.)

 

[TootsieFootsie]

Not sure if this has been posted.

No Cookies | The Advertiser


The mother of the missing Beaumont children has died as the five-decade search for Jane, Arnna and Grant remains one of Australia’s most baffling mysteries.

Nancy Helen Beaumont, 92, died at Eldercare Allambi in Glengowrie on Monday without the closure and answers she had long sought.

Her children’s father, Jim, also aged in his 90s, still lives in Adelaide.

Mrs Beaumont’s death comes as Major Crime detectives stay committed to solving the 53-year-old cold case.

 

[gregjrichards]

Not sure if this has been posted.

No Cookies | The Advertiser


The mother of the missing Beaumont children has died as the five-decade search for Jane, Arnna and Grant remains one of Australia’s most baffling mysteries.

Nancy Helen Beaumont, 92, died at Eldercare Allambi in Glengowrie on Monday without the closure and answers she had long sought.

Her children’s father, Jim, also aged in his 90s, still lives in Adelaide.

Mrs Beaumont’s death comes as Major Crime detectives stay committed to solving the 53-year-old cold case.

I’m so sorry to read this. It is a horrific tragedy what Mrs. Beaumont and her husband have endured I just hope she is back with her beloved children in heaven now. May Mrs. Beaumont Rest In Peace. My thoughts and prayers are with Mr. Beaumont.

 

[Georgy]

Although alibi was examined at inquest I didn't read anywhere it was confirmed,except by MS, whom no-one could confirm for sure was at the cafe or school assembly that morning.

It was confirmed in various ways and accepted.
There is a lot that happens at inquest which is not made public

 

[Georgy]

And the voicemails deleted rather than phone logs? I have not seen that?

Ffc left a voice msg..its also in inquest evidence and been reported.
False sighting, was referring to Dean Pollards 100% sighting

 

[JWSleuth]

Ffc left a voice msg..its also in inquest evidence and been reported.
False sighting, was referring to Dean Pollards 100% sighting

Isn't the voicemail different to deleted call logs?

 

[JWSleuth]

It was confirmed in various ways and accepted.
There is a lot that happens at inquest which is not made public

Thanks I was not at the inquest and I have not seen anything reported as concrete. (Could be media's intention) but news and persons at the inquest have not provided anything reasonable IMO.

This is my confusion!

 

[JWSleuth]

I’m not sure what you mean. Cases don’t get “allowed” by courts. One party files a claim, the other party files a defence and there is then argument about all sorts of things such as whether the case has been properly pleaded or defended. A timetable will be given so that the issues are properly set out and defined. There will be settlement conferences, mediations etc and if the case doesn’t resolve it will eventually go to trial.

What are your thoughts if historical accusations where considered reasonable at the time - therefore investigation proceeded based on reasonable assumption of pending historical case? If that makes sense!

 

[Georgy]

Isn't the voicemail different to deleted call logs?

Deleted voice calls were discussed..no mention of call logs deleted.
Surely everyone deletes voice messages?

 

[JWSleuth]

Deleted voice calls were discussed..no mention of call logs deleted.
Surely everyone deletes voice messages?

Ok thanks - earlier articles state call logs (not to say this is accurate) I could understand voicemail deletion though - but not call logs, they barely take space. And are good to check When you last called someone work related.

No! I like to keep mine lol! Especially business and work related.

 

[Georgy]

Thanks I was not at the inquest and I have not seen anything reported as concrete. (Could be media's intention) but news and persons at the inquest have not provided anything reasonable IMO.

This is my confusion!

I can see your confusion.
The smallest things matter, and reading continuously that call logs were deleted without explaining exactly what these calls were is just misleading or not much thought put into the articles..
Ffc calls bs and leaves a message (a voicemail msg)