Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #50

Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #1,261
in my opinion i think its important to keep an open mind too though, we only have the select minimum info fed to us from msm which we all decipher in our own ways and dont have to or shouldnt just accept anything without question, no matter who says it, we all get gut reactions to certain people which sways our opinions rightly or wrongly and my gut reaction to ps is very different to that of bs, but i dont think either of these men are involved
this case was stuffed up from the start and i feel very sorry for gj not being able to follow through
Totally agree, and it shouldn't be open slather of accusations against anyone that hasn't been arrested, charged and convicted of a crime yet either, IMO.
It's called Judicial process and the presumption of innocence until otherwise proven. That's why we have a Justice system, otherwise why bother?
 
  • #1,262
  • #1,263
Just a reminder of the act for NSW

NSW legislation

part 3, vision 4, section 31

31 Emergency use of surveillance devices—threat of serious personal violence or substantial property damage
(1) A law enforcement officer may use a surveillance device without a surveillance device warrant if the law enforcement officer on reasonable grounds suspects or believes that—
(a) an imminent threat of serious violence to a person or substantial damage to property or that a serious narcotics offence will be committed exists, and
(b) the use of a surveillance device is immediately necessary for the purpose of dealing with that threat, and
(c) the circumstances are so serious and the matter is of such urgency that the use of a surveillance device is warranted, and
(d) it is not practicable in the circumstances to apply for a surveillance device warrant.
(2) A law enforcement officer authorised to use a surveillance device by subsection (1) may do anything that the officer could be authorised to do by a surveillance device warrant.(3) A law enforcement officer is not authorised by this section to use a surveillance device outside this jurisdiction.

part 3, vision 4, section 31
 
  • #1,264
I'm around now if needed to do the tweets.........off to catch up!!
@drsleuth it would be great if you could take over... as big storm here and I may go MIA.... :D Thanks...
 
  • #1,265
  • #1,266
Thank you @ everyone for posting today...
 
  • #1,267
I’m intrigued! I’ve looked through all Sydney cases sitting today and can’t see one that might be relevant to this case...
Initials are RB and its a child 🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬 case.( wealthy businessman)
 
  • #1,268
I can't open twitter today - on either laptop or mobile phone - is it slow for others?
 
  • #1,269
FF have been ruled out as suspects. Please refrain from comments like this as we need this thread open

From the internal affairs tape of Jubes, played in court on Monday morning.


“There was a school of thought that they (the foster parents) were involved. I respect that view,” he said. One colleague “was saying she felt the foster parents could be involved. I personally didn’t see it. But again, let’s look at it. We did a major operation. These are the foster parents.
“We’ve got to properly explore (them)............................................................................................................................



“We released them, put them in a car, and the conversation (recorded on the listening device) satisfied me that they weren’t (responsible for William’s disappearance).”
He said most detectives were satisfied that William’s foster parents weren’t involved.
There is no evidence to link them to the crime; Mr Jubelin has many times said they were ruled out years ago.

Gary Jubelin recorded person of interest Paul Savage to protect himself
NoCookies | The Australian
 
Last edited:
  • #1,270
  • #1,271
  • #1,272
Lia Harris

The court is now being played a second recorded interview with Jubelin and Professional Standards officers. He tells offices at the outset he believes he’s being “unduly targeted” by NSW Police “to justify their actions in derailing the William Tyrrell investigation”.
 
  • #1,273
Lia Harris

He called their approach “heavy-handed” and said it would have “drastic and immediate affects on the William Tyrrell investigation”.
 
  • #1,274
Lia Harris
Jubelin told the officers he’d built a rapport with Savage and if he’d decided to reveal something to police he “would most likely reach out to me” and said “when I’m talking about impacting on the investigation that’s the type of impact I’m talking about”.
 
  • #1,275
Another interesting case in Sydney today, not sure if its in the same place as Jubelin’s but could be very revealing.

revealing in what way?
Millionaire’s alleged child 🤬🤬🤬🤬 stash
 
  • #1,276
Good afternoon all, I haven’t posted for a long time but still following along. Thanks for all the tweets, happy to help if anyone needs a break.
 
  • #1,277
This is for continuation of surveillance use - long read though. BBM x 2 below may be relevant (?) subject to previous section 31, posted earlier

Surveillance Devices Act 2007 No 64
Current version for 22 November 2019 to date (accessed 10 February 2020 at 14:27)
Part 3 Division 4 Section 32

32 Emergency authorisation—continued use of authorised surveillance device in participating jurisdiction
(1) A law enforcement officer may apply to a senior officer of the agency of which the officer is a member for an emergency authorisation for the use of a surveillance device if—
(a) use of a surveillance device in this jurisdiction is authorised by section 31 in connection with an investigation into a relevant offence, and
(b) the law enforcement officer on reasonable grounds suspects or believes that—
(i) the investigation in relation to which the surveillance device is authorised in this jurisdiction is likely to extend to a participating jurisdiction, and
(ii) the use of the surveillance device in a participating jurisdiction is immediately necessary to prevent the loss of any evidence, and
(iii) the circumstances are so serious and the matter is of such urgency that the use of the surveillance device in the participating jurisdiction is warranted, and
(iv) it is not practicable in the circumstances to apply for a surveillance device warrant.

(2) An application may be made orally, in writing or by telephone, fax, e-mail or any other means of communication.(3) A senior officer may give an emergency authorisation for the use of a surveillance device on an application under subsection (1) if satisfied that—
(a) use of the surveillance device in this jurisdiction is authorised under a law of this jurisdiction, in connection with an investigation into a relevant offence, and
(b) there are reasonable grounds for the suspicion or belief founding the application.
(4) An emergency authorisation given under this section may authorise the law enforcement officer to whom it is given to do anything that a surveillance device warrant may authorise the officer to do.(5) An emergency authorisation cannot be granted in connection with a serious narcotics offence.



Surveillance Devices Act 2007 No 64
Current version for 22 November 2019 to date (accessed 10 February 2020 at 14:31)
Part 3 Division 4 Section 33

33 Application for approval after use of surveillance device without warrant or under emergency authorisation
(1) Within 2 business days after a law enforcement officer uses a surveillance device without a warrant in an emergency under section 31, the law enforcement officer (or another person on his or her behalf) must apply to an eligible Judge for approval of the exercise of powers under that section.(2) Within 2 business days after giving an emergency authorisation under section 32, a senior officer (or another person on his or her behalf) must apply to an eligible Judge for approval of the exercise of powers under the emergency authorisation.(3) An application for approval must—
(a) include the name of the applicant, and
(b) specify the kind of surveillance device sought to be approved, and
(c) be supported by an affidavit setting out the grounds on which the approval is sought.
(3A) An application for approval may also be accompanied by an application for a surveillance device warrant made in accordance with Division 2.(4) The eligible Judge may refuse to consider the application until the applicant gives the eligible Judge all the information the eligible Judge requires about the application in the way the eligible Judge requires.(5) An application is not to be heard in open court.
 
  • #1,278
Lia Harris
Jubelin tells officers the charges are a “witch-hunt” by NSW Police “to justify their actions against me”. He said “I’ve never seen a matter handled the way this has been handled”
 
  • #1,279
revealing in what way?
Millionaire’s alleged child 🤬🤬🤬🤬 stash
I'm guessing going back to the "pedophile ring theory" and people in high places involved ….???
Would love to know if this tip off to the Police came via the Coroner's hotline????
 
  • #1,280
Jubelin also revealed he and his deputy, Detective Sergeant Craig Lambert, almost came to blows in 2018 in a NSW Police headquarters meeting room over his continued scrutiny of Mr Savage.

He said he asked other investigators to step outside when Det Sgt Lambert, the designated officer in charge, said "you're just picking on him" in a briefing.
"It's a particularly difficult investigation," Jubelin said.
William Tyrrell cop says taping was necessary because of 'suicide possibility'

So Lambert thought Jube's was picking on Savage.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
114
Guests online
2,453
Total visitors
2,567

Forum statistics

Threads
633,156
Messages
18,636,546
Members
243,415
Latest member
n_ibbles
Back
Top