Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #63

[vatzjr]

I’m absolutely flummoxed that people today (especially those familiar with the particulars of this case) would still entertain the theory of bio-family involvement.

The birth parents were in Sydney the day William went missing. They went to their home that day to check if William was there. They were verified by CCTV footage and receipts of their where abouts that day.

Williams birth mother has had an extremely tough few years. She is a mess, has suffered numerous breakdowns , same as his father .
Not much support has been made available for those two, infact it's disgusting.

Thank you. If it hasn’t been mentioned (sorry if it has), I also would like to impress that no one in the bio-family had the FC’s address, let alone Nana’s. These are people if I remember correctly struggled to find a lawyer during this mess (apologies if I have that wrong). Saying they were unresourceful would be putting it mildly. How on earth would they have been able to orchestrate a kidnapping of this magnitude from scratch? The FC’s knew more about them than vice-verse.

I watched the interview the BM did for Channel 7 in 2018, where she chose to come public before the major media. Watching her talk about what she has gone through, how much she misses WT … you can’t fake that … sorry … the bio-family has been grossly marginalised during all of this trauma …

BTW. In the Little Boy Lost podcast (conducted around the one-year anniversary mark), Lia Harris discussed how WT impacted Kendall, but didn’t mention the bio-family once. Not once. Disgusting. She may have been taking her cues from LE like a lot of others, but her bias in this matter is quite evident. JMO.

 

[sniffsniffcough]

https://www.kidspot.com.au/news/pol...e/news-story/cead7118c854a92ba362ca3ae176dd88

"As the search for William Tyrrell continues, police have excavated a huge pit, filled with buried household debris – which they reportedly believe could be where the missing toddler's remains are."

It is disturbing to think that William is buried amongst household debris. What is the house/building in the background of this picture?

Anyone have any idea who owned or operated the horse riding centre in 2014 or before? Anyone know the history of this land they are searching? Could there have been a a family connection to that property? Was this property used as a household refuse disposal site or garden refuse disposal site in the past?

 

[sniffsniffcough]

I think it is highly likely that the judge sees some pretty horrific cases of abuse - perhaps cigarette burns, starvation, lice, other nasties - and on the judge's professional scale, the alleged abuse doesn't rate very high.

Perhaps the judge also thinks this could be a frivolous charge. We don't know the details or circumstances.

As the child has been removed and is under the watch of FaCS, there seems to be no imminent danger.

imo

Minor abuse can be a coverup for far worse things occurring IMO

 

[sniffsniffcough]

View attachment 323743 View attachment 323742 View attachment 323741

I reckon WT was facing slightly more to the right than your arrow shows. I’ve found some more photos which show there was possibly another chair beside the table, possibly a plant pot and also a washing line attached to the wall so quite a busy corner.

The laundry window was directly behind William. refer to timestamp photos posted today.

 

[Estelle]

Anyone have any idea who owned or operated the horse riding centre in 2014 or before? Anyone know the history of this land they are searching? Could there have been a a family connection to that property? Was this property used as a household refuse disposal site or garden refuse disposal site in the past?

It's certainly sounding as if it could have been a household refuse disposal site or garden refuse disposal site in the past to me. IMO

 

[Blues Clues]

What I have been trying to understand is why the Judge felt the need to publicly downplay the alleged assault on LT in such a way which IMO is not professional. And why the FP's defence so far is that LT procured the possible bruises from a horse.

In New South Wales common assault carries a maximum penalty of two years imprisonment and/or a fine of 50 penalty units. A person is often charged with common assault where he or she assaults another person, but does not cause an injury amounting to actual bodily harm (for example bruising or scratches) or grievous bodily harm (e.g. causing loss of sight, complicated fractures or significant injuries requiring surgery).

What Is Common Assault?
An assault is an act that causes another person to apprehend immediate and unlawful violence. While most assaults involve unwanted physical contact an assault does not necessarily require actual physical contact. All it requires it that the victim apprehends physical contact. So if, for example, a person raises his or her fist to another person, an assault could be found to have occurred, despite the other person not actually being hit. At law this is known as the distinction between “battery” (causing physical contact) and “assault” (causing the apprehension of physical contact).

The following acts constitute common assault:

• Punching, hitting, slapping, pushing or kicking another person;
• Raising a fist towards a person as though to hit that person;
• Spitting upon another person;
• Threatening to hurt another person;
• Throwing an item (such as a bottle) at another person (whether or not it makes contact);
• Physically restraining someone against their will.

Common assault can cover a range of actions and injuries, It is a less serious offence than assault occasioning actual bodily harm (AOABH) or causing grievous bodily harm (GBH), which involve harm to the victim. It is not uncommon for the police to charge a person with AOABH where the alleged conduct would sit comfortably within the definition of common assault.

Thoroughly understanding the definitions of common assault and AOABH is critical to successfully negotiating with prosecutors and can mean the difference between a person facing a maximum 2 years imprisonment for common assault or a maximum 5 years imprisonment for AOABH.

Which Court Will Hear The Matter?
Common assault is generally dealt with in the Local Court. However, the prosecution or defence can elect to have the matter dealt with in the District Court. If the matter is dealt with in the Local Court the maximum penalty is 2 years imprisonment and/or 20 penalty units.

What Must Be Proven?
For a person to be found guilty of common assault, the prosecution must prove each of the following matters beyond a reasonable doubt:

• that the accused applied physical force to another person; or
• that the accused threatened another with immediate violence; and this was done:
• internationally or recklessly; and
• without the person’s consent; and
• without lawful excuse.

Common Assault NSW - Charges, Penalties and Sentencing

She isn't playing this case down, she is playing other cases up. She is asking the media why they only turn up for a case that will create a headline, why don't they care about all the other cases IMO

 

[Mrs G Norris]

Karen Webb has just been appointed next NSW Police Commissioner: Karen Webb becomes first female NSW Police commissioner

 

[sniffsniffcough]

I have accidentally posted a few messages in the media 'no discussion' link which include photos. Can someone advise me please how to transfer these messages to this discussion thread? Somebody else has also posted articles there today that I replied to. Feeling stupid as!

 

[PrimeSuspect]

Karen Webb is the new NSWPOL commissioner! Yay!

 

[HilaryHormone]

The cat's were dropped at a bordering kennel in Sydney. The FP'S owned the cats not FGM.

In regards to the balcony IMO FACS never done an inspection of FGM house for approval that it was a safe place, because if they did...that small gate to the balcony would've been made to have been higher and non climbable for children.

If you have a pool your fence needs to be a certain height and can't be climbed. A high balcony IMO would have similar rules.

IMO it wouldn’t have been necessary for FACS to assess every building a looked after child could potentially visit. They wouldn’t have the resources for starters. Background and Police checks of immediate family would probably be the extent of what would be required IMO.

In fact, I’m surprised they had to seek permission for the trip as visiting family or friends is entirely ‘normal’ and social networks are to be encouraged. Over here, we tend to hold a generic consent form and risk assessment on file, only requiring specific permissions for international trips.

 

[sniffsniffcough]

this real estate site is a super source of (14) photographs of 48 Benaroon Drive. Might help people to orientate into the landscape

48 Benaroon Drive, Kendall NSW 2439 | Allhomes

 

[Greenie75]

I think some have waited a long time to get lt out of their care and have watched everything in 7 yrs

Interesting - perhaps the lockdown in July/August when FFC, MFC and LT were home together ignited some frustrations. Many families found home schooling an experience of heightened emotions.

 

[inkpink]

Interesting - perhaps the lockdown in July/August when FFC, MFC and LT were home together ignited some frustrations. Many families found home schooling an experience of heightened emotions.

BBM - Ain't that the truth...

 

[Deleted member 296843]

We're the children wearing helmets when riding the bikes?
If he had issues with wearing singlet when getting dressed could there be any issues around helmets?

 

[Awakening]

OK put it another way and example is photo 5 the roar photo.

The digital camera is said to be set on Bali time because the fosters purchased the camera in Bali during their trip in August 2014 and it is said they didn't reset the camera to NSW time when they returned. IMO

It is said the 5th photo, the roar photo, was taken at a corrected time of 9.37am nsw time. When the created time of this photo showed at 1:58 hours/minutes earlier. But that can't be because Bali is exactly 2 hours behind Sydney.

So the roar photo was initially printed out for use and displayed to the media for the 1st time on Saturday 13/9/2014 and didn't have the timestamp stuff on it. None of the other 4 photos were given to the media until the coroner released them in 2019.

The Coroner obviously received a Brief of Evidence from Gary Jubelin in mid 2018 because she ordered the search of Benaroon and Cedar Loggers Lane and she attended those scenes with Jubelin. IMO

At the beginning of the coroners inquest a legal rep pointed out to Bio fathers rep the discrepancy. The photos would have been prepared by NSWPOL to be included in the Brief.

I posit that the photos were all downloaded and prepared by NSWPOL at the same time in that process and during that time someone manually applied an adjustment to match what the foster mother had stated was the timeline of the morning of 12/9/2014.

If the photos were downloaded onto the NSWPOL system during daylight saving there would be 3:00 hours difference not 1:58 seconds. Therefore it is likely IMM whoever did the time adjustment added 2 hours instead of 1 hour to mistakenly match FFC stated critical timeline. It is possible the timestamp of 1:58 and a few seconds was a time inaccuracy that would have read 2 hours if the inaccuracy didn't exist but I doubt it.

There has been no release of information from the Coroner that verifies the outcome of investigation she ordered re photo timestamping.

Maybe the timestamp accuracy/adjustment/correction also revealed new and fresh evidence about the timeline of 12/9/2014 and in some way lead to the current stance re POI of NSWPOL as detailed in numerous media releases in the last 9 or 10 days. IMO

I hope this explanation makes the muddy water clearer for you.

There is something about that particular photo that is known to the FFC IMO and that was not realized by NSWPOL IMO until questioned by legal reps at Inquest and it may not be only about timestamps IMO.

I also believe the release of FFC walk-through which detailed in her own words her drive down Batar Creek Road was a monumental decision by the Coroner.

I'm sorry @sniffsniffcough I must be incredibly thick because I still don't understand the point you are making.

If police manually entered the time of 9.37am what difference would that make? Would that mean the photo was actually taken at 6.37am, 7.37am or 8.37am on the 12/9/2014?

Police say to their colleague "Bob" "Bob, upload these photos onto the computer. The time on the camera is set to Bali time so please adjust the time on these photos to NSW time"

Bob sees the time on the camera is 7.39am so adds 2 hours to it 9.39am. But Bob has fat fingers and enters 9.37am.

Or Bob is uploading these photos in the summertime when its daylight saving time. He sees the camera time of 7.39am, remembers he was told camera is on Bali time, does a quick google search to see the time difference is 3 hours. 7.39 plus 3 hours is 10.39am so that would be the time he would put in.

Unless you are suggesting the camera wasn't set to 7.39am?

Daylight saving in Australia is between October and March and clocks go forward one hour.

Between October and March NSW is 3 hours ahead of Perth, 3 hours ahead of Bali. April thru September there is no daylight savings and NSW is 2 hours ahead of Perth and Bali.

What time do you think the photo was actually taken and why do you think this?

 

[JayWill]

She isn't playing this case down, she is playing other cases up. She is asking the media why they only turn up for a case that will create a headline, why don't they care about all the other cases IMO

I find that unprofessional too. Of course the press will be interested in this case.

 

[HilaryHormone]

Possibly but he was facing in the general direction of my clumsy arrow.

Edit: and the 'white thing' is more likely the sunshining through the treescape in the back garden.

In her own words FFC said she was crouching. Refer to 60Minutes video posted link upthread yesterday.

The laundry window was directly behind William. refer to timestamp photos posted today.

I’ve referred to all you mentioned before, thank you. My point has clearly been lost so I won’t labour it.

 

[JBowie]

FM did state 'my other daughter '. Sorry, can't remember where I heard this.

Yes, she did, but if you hear it in context it's pretty clear to me that she meant to say 'my other child', that is 'my daughter'.

 

[JayWill]

IMO it wouldn’t have been necessary for FACS to assess every building a looked after child could potentially visit. They wouldn’t have the resources for starters. Background and Police checks of immediate family would probably be the extent of what would be required IMO.

In fact, I’m surprised they had to seek permission for the trip as visiting family or friends is entirely ‘normal’ and social networks are to be encouraged. Over here, we tend to hold a generic consent form and risk assessment on file, only requiring specific permissions for international trips.

The RSPCA inspects a property before you can adopt a dog that is an escape artist.

 

[Estelle]

She isn't playing this case down, she is playing other cases up. She is asking the media why they only turn up for a case that will create a headline, why don't they care about all the other cases IMO

I can see your point, however, she adds.......

"These allegations are not the most serious the criminal courts see by any stretch. In every court in New South Wales there are matters not dissimilar to the complaint raised here. in fact, only last week I dealt with a far more serious allegation in relation to a five-year-old child.'

William Tyrrell's foster parents Sydney faces court Hornsby assault of a child | Daily Mail Online

IMO making comparisons with this alleged case and another case by a Judge in public is downplaying it as the evidence has not even been tested yet. IMO it is totally unprofessional and shows a possible bias. I thought Judges were supposed to be neutral.