Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #51

[JWSleuth]

I am just following this Trial right now and talking about the info. coming out in court is all.
The issue of Cook stating about the WT case status as "Unsolved Homicide" was mentioned in court previously and today.
So since GJ has been off the case for some time, i gather the info. on the case is as an "Unsolved Homicide" is more current?

If it goes to unsolved i would say they mean cold case (which would be pick up when you have time) not sure if I commented on that correctly in my last post) that was the edit... insinuation “ from Cook.

 

[sosocurious]

The case was not at a dead end when it went to inquest, and still isn't, it was described many times as an Ongoing Investigation during the Inquest.

If it was at a dead end, what is Mr Laidlaw doing leading the investigation?

Barnes says that while traditionally an inquest into an unsolved homicide or suspicious death has been held at the close of the police investigation, when almost every lead has been exhausted, a coroner's court, which remains totally independent, can play an important role in the investigation itself.

Conclusions are re- examined and assumptions tested through cross-examination by lawyers.

Barnes says it is not taking over an investigation but enhancing it.

"A coroner getting involved and opening an inquest doesn't mean that the police investigation ends," Barnes says.

"It can all work together.''

We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph

 

[intriguedinterest]

Not sure what you mean by relevant? Relevant for when? An AVO is only granted for a period of time, it has to be reapplied for when it runs out.
If PS is no longer under an AVO which i gather he isn't as the situation has resolved, then it is currently no longer relevant. If that is what GJ was referring to?

I elect this to be the POINT OF THE DAY. Very well said.

 

[purpleandgreen]

Barnes says that while traditionally an inquest into an unsolved homicide or suspicious death has been held at the close of the police investigation, when almost every lead has been exhausted, a coroner's court, which remains totally independent, can play an important role in the investigation itself.

Conclusions are re- examined and assumptions tested through cross-examination by lawyers.

Barnes says it is not taking over an investigation but enhancing it.

"A coroner getting involved and opening an inquest doesn't mean that the police investigation ends," Barnes says.

"It can all work together.''

We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph

And let’s hope that’s what happens. It’s time William and his families got justice.

And it’s time Jubes got justice too. IMO

 

[Bohemian]

What would the outcome be for GJ if found guilty of illegal recordings

I found this, tbl:

‘The penalty for individuals is an $11,000.00 fine or up to 5 years in prison for a serious breach of the Act.

A person who intentionally or recklessly communicates or publishes the contents of a private conversation which could endanger the health or safety of someone, or prejudice an investigation, faces a maximum penalty of 7 years in prison.’

‘Offences relating to the obligations which law enforcement officers or police officers must follow after the issue of a warrant carry a maximum penalty of $2,200.00 or up to 12 months in prison.’

Listening Devices and the law in NSW | Criminal Lawyers

 

[intriguedinterest]

The page takes a long time to reload on and off.. very intermittent though

What I find is when replying to a message and the reply window opens, choose 'more options'. Then type the reply, if you like you can preview the reply but I dont do that, then use the 'reply to thread' button and the reply instantly goes on line. If I try replying directly from the thread the reply hangs for quite some time.

Hope this helps

 

[intriguedinterest]

I found this, tbl:

‘The penalty for individuals is an $11,000.00 fine or up to 5 years in prison for a serious breach of the Act.

A person who intentionally or recklessly communicates or publishes the contents of a private conversation which could endanger the health or safety of someone, or prejudice an investigation, faces a maximum penalty of 7 years in prison.’

‘Offences relating to the obligations which law enforcement officers or police officers must follow after the issue of a warrant carry a maximum penalty of $2,200.00 or up to 12 months in prison.’

Listening Devices and the law in NSW | Criminal Lawyers

All pretty serious in my view. Jubelin has admitted making the recordings too hasn't he?

 

[interested64]

BBM : Isn't it a homicide detectives job to ask the "hard" questions ?? Even expected

imagine .. did you take William..no i didnt..ok have a nice day haha this pc crap will see no one arrested in the future at this rate

 

[intriguedinterest]

Barnes says that while traditionally an inquest into an unsolved homicide or suspicious death has been held at the close of the police investigation, when almost every lead has been exhausted, a coroner's court, which remains totally independent, can play an important role in the investigation itself.

Conclusions are re- examined and assumptions tested through cross-examination by lawyers.

Barnes says it is not taking over an investigation but enhancing it.

"A coroner getting involved and opening an inquest doesn't mean that the police investigation ends," Barnes says.

"It can all work together.''

We’re for Sydney | Daily Telegraph

Jubelin has stated in Court he referred William's file to the Coroner (Coroner Grahame), it is my view he knew in his own mind the case investigation was faltering and put the case to the Coroner to see if there could be any other avenue of investigation uncovered or considered. I believe from my readings, a Coronial Inquest is held in an attempt to come to a decision (finding) if the person subject of the inquiry is considered to be still alive, or deceased. If the person is considered deceased, the file then would be returned to the unsolved homicide squad investigators.


Whichever way, it is my firm view, if the file is returned to the unsolved homicide squad, the investigation will be very active but covert with not much released to the media. I personally do not believe any person so far mentioned as a person of interest is involved or has knowledge of who is involved.

The truth will reveal itself when we least expect it, I have no doubt in my mind.

 

[intriguedinterest]

duplicate deleted

 

[intriguedinterest]

Strikeforce Rosann was made up of detectives seconded from various units - child exploitation, homicide, missing persons and various other is my understanding. The formation of Rosann might have set up internal rangling in my view.

 

[Karinna]

imagine .. did you take William..no i didnt..ok have a nice day haha this pc crap will see no one arrested in the future at this rate

But Mr. Jubelin isn't on Trial for the way he questioned POI's to my knowledge.
Of course cops play good cop bad cop when interrogating someone they think might have been involved in a crime. It's SOP from my understanding.

 

[Karinna]

All pretty serious in my view. Jubelin has admitted making the recordings too hasn't he?

Well if there is record of them he can't very well deny them.
And if he did that illegally therein lies the problem.
(quote)
Former NSW homicide detective Gary Jubelin will stand trial in the new year over charges he illegally recorded four conversations with a person linked to the investigation of missing boy William Tyrrell.
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...w-detective-gary-jubelin-20190924-p52uac.html

 

[interested64]

I don't need to explain it to you, it is self explanatory IMO. Police can only do so much. The case came to a dead end hence the Inquest. Where were police supposed to go with it after years of finding nothing?

personaly i think NSW Police helped bring it to an end

 

[Thebottomline]

But Mr. Jubelin isn't on Trial for the way he questioned POI's to my knowledge.
Of course cops play good cop bad cop when interrogating someone they think might have been involved in a crime. It's SOP from my understanding.

Why was he asked about his questioning PS and his supposed heavy handed tactics to what the prosecutor said was an elderly mentally unwell man. It wasn’t about the secret so called recordings

 

[Thebottomline]

Maybe GJ’s necktie might be called as a witness.

 

[JWSleuth]

Why was he asked about his questioning PS and his supposed heavy handed tactics to what the prosecutor said was an elderly mentally unwell man. It wasn’t about the secret so called recordings

this is where I see playground stuff... if it was in a higher court there would objections on relevance me thinks!

 

[intriguedinterest]

Lia Harris
@LiaJHarris

William’s foster mother told the court Supt Cook then told her William’s case would go to Unsolved Homicide. She told the court she responded “you can’t send it to Unsolved” and he replied “it’s going there”.

How do we know the exact words that were said and how those exact words were actually said? Was there a transcript of the discussion taken from some recording, of the discussion between Jubelin and Scott? I think not otherwise it would have been used in Court.

Another thing I find very strange is why was this alleged discussion between Jubelin and Scott raised in the current Trial? What did it have to do with the allegations that the 4 recordings were made on Jubelin's personal mobile and were done so without a current warrant?

Why bring in the female carer/mum to testify about her discussion with Scott? Was there a transcript of the discussion the carer had with Scott? Was this discussion in person or by telephone? If the discussion was using a nsw police landline or hotline number I am sure they are recorded. Last I spoke with police a general recording said so prior to actual discussion. What did this discussion have to do with the Trial of allegations against Jubelin?

I am confused. Is anyone else confused?

edit deleted typo

 

[Thebottomline]

How do we know the exact words that were said and how those exact words were actually said? Was there a transcript of the discussion taken from some recording, of the discussion between Jubelin and Scott? I think not otherwise it would have been used in Court.

Another thing I find very strange is why was this alleged discussion between Jubelin and Scott raised in the current Trial? What did it have to do with the allegations that the 4 recordings were made on Jubelin's personal mobile and were done so without a current warrant?

Why bring in the female carer/mum to testify about her discussion with Scott? Was there a transcript of the discussion the carer had with Scott? Was this discussion in person or by telephone? If the discussion was using via a nsw police landline or hotline number I am sure they are recorded. Last I spoke with police a general recording said so prior to actual discussion. What did this discussion have to do with the Trial of allegations against Jubelin?

I am confused. Is anyone else confused?

Nope not at all

 

[intriguedinterest]

Nope not at all

If there is no corroborating evidence how can such testimony be accepted in Court? That is what I do not understand. And I really don't understand what the relevance is to the Trial of allegations.