Australia Australia - William Tyrrell Disappeared While Playing in Yard - Kendall (NSW) #77

[bearbear]

Sure, that supports the current theory and that they are unpleasant people, but doesn’t mean they concealed an accident and moved his body. And if they did where’s the body?

People suggest he may have got lost and say but where’s the body? They also then quote FM as saying he wasn’t a wanderer. But why believe that statement if you don’t believe other things she has said?

i dont believe anything the foster parents have said

 

[k-mac]

This week, Downing Centre Local Court was told homicide detectives partnered with the commission in July 2021 to form Operation Harden, which examined the disappearance of three-year-old William from Kendall on the NSW Mid North Coast in September 2014.

Both foster parents were called to give evidence and were asked about a range of issues, including two assaults on another child in their care in 2021.

More here…

William Tyrrell’s foster father not guilty of lying to Crime Commission

Magistrate John Arms said some of the commission’s questions were vague and he could not be satisfied the man had knowingly given false or misleading answers.

www.smh.com.au

thanks slouth.
Interesting article indeed.

so....my take away.
The ff gets away with lying because the police hadn't disclosed the recordings to him proving he was lying which then in turn didn't give him the chance to clarify his answers.

Its the police's fault that he lied.
they didn't tell him they had recorded him saying the opposite.


what this pair get away with makes me sick.
Absolutely disgusting.
It is clear cut the lying and the covering for the FM.

Money talks and BS walks.

moo

 

[bearbear]

Imagine, you are little L and have one of many disputs with your foster mother, and your FFC has nothing better to do than calling her husband on her phone. The foster father immediately returns from his way to his business, only to help his wife to build a front of 2 adults against you, the little 11 year old. Then, later, in front of the commission, the foster father just remembers "a little incorrect" because of his emotions or anything else and isn't guilty of anything.

Is that supposed to be justice?

its sickening and really sad for the little girl, theyre both liars

 

[FromGermany1]

Yes, I'm finding this troubling. Apparently the event was memorable and recent and yet the Guardian article is saying he incorrectly stated his wife had never harmed a child. Even though the FFC committed the offences the MFC is being questioned about, she has been taped confiding to a friend that she has thought about leaving him due to his cruel attitude towards the child/ren. Is he indifferent to abuse or maybe thinks the behaviour falls within the realms of normal parenting? And there is a higher level of expectation around disciplining with foster parents. There's something off here to me as if the children were her special project on the side if she wanted kids so badly... IDK, I've had this impression before as well. MOO

bbm
I would want to know, how exactly this attitude played out. Since 2014 I'm knowing rumors, and there is always some truth in rumors. Who from LE will finally get to the unpleasant core with these "not-guilty", pretty protected people?

Allegedly MFC had a cruel attitude acc. to FFC, but she harnessed him to be an equally responsible parent, as we noticed here and then. At least it seemed to be like that. If I had been the FFC, I had kept the children a little away from him (or I hadn't taken them into my care).
Astonishing, that MFC of all people was the one, who got hysterical and even cried, when little W disappeared (not much time had passed, when he did that, and it was not yet hopeless).
All MOO.

 

[SouthAussie]

This week, Downing Centre Local Court was told homicide detectives partnered with the commission in July 2021 to form Operation Harden, which examined the disappearance of three-year-old William from Kendall on the NSW Mid North Coast in September 2014.

Both foster parents were called to give evidence and were asked about a range of issues, including two assaults on another child in their care in 2021.

More here…

William Tyrrell’s foster father not guilty of lying to Crime Commission

Magistrate John Arms said some of the commission’s questions were vague and he could not be satisfied the man had knowingly given false or misleading answers.

www.smh.com.au

Sounds to me that Magistrate John Arms may have taken into consideration that the recordings were never played to the FD at the NSWCC. He was not confronted with his knowledge of the assaults. Which would have cleared the "lying" matter up, right there and then. And not wasted the court's time and money.

Typically, judges are not keen on some police tactics. They also didn't like Jubes recording PS outside the warrant dates to protect himself from being accused of saying or not saying something wrong. imo

 

[SouthAussie]

I do agree…. But there is always that minuscule chance, until the case is solved…

For example, did a Neighbor have visitors the evening before?? Did they see the children arrive?? Did they have all night to plan and fantasise ???

In the realms of statistics, it is probably unlikely, but it can’t be totally ruled out until the case is resolved …. That is why I think the time before William went missing needs to be fully examined ….

I have my doubts about intense questioning of all of the neighbours in the area, with so much focus initially on “little boy lost”…. IMO,
Every person in that area, should have been made account for every minute from the night before up until, and after, William went missing …. And what they saw… JMO

We need to remember the Police didn’t manage to get a formal statement from Heather Savage ( a direct neighbour), before she died …. So what else was missed?? It just makes me wonder…

Are there any details that were reported, and not followed up by Police ??
Details that were not deemed important at the time??? For example, similar to that report in “the drawer” in the Ivan Milat Case???

Craddock has implored the public to come forward with information, perhaps he should also implore the Police to recall any little detail that was reported and dismissed ????

With all of the technology available, and us living in modern times, it is incredibly frustrating …. a little boy can not just disappear, and never be found …

ALL MOO

I went back in the threads last night to see what was in Laura Beacroft's questionnaire that was passed out to the locals to document who was at their house when William disappeared. (And other information.)

The questionnaire asked specifically who was at their homes between 9:30 and 10:30am. 400 copies of the questionnaire were made and handed out in an effort to develop a more focused POI list.

We never were able to find all of the questions, so I wonder if people were asked who was at their home the previous night or left earlier that morning. And I wonder if anyone misrepresented some facts in their answers.

A few links about the questionnaire from previous posts ... Link and Link and Link

 

[JLZ]

Sounds to me that Magistrate John Arms may have taken into consideration that the recordings were never played to the FD at the NSWCC. He was not confronted with his knowledge of the assaults. Which would have cleared the "lying" matter up, right there and then. And not wasted the court's time and money.

Typically, judges are not keen on some police tactics. They also didn't like Jubes recording PS outside the warrant dates to protect himself from being accused of saying or not saying something wrong. imo

IMO, the only way he would not recall being told of the kicking just three weeks before, is if FFC had been constantly reporting similar evil attacks and it all merged together.

 

[SouthAussie]

IMO, the only way he would not recall being told of the kicking just three weeks before, is if FFC had been constantly reporting similar evil attacks and it all merged together.

Well, they had about a year of listening to the household and that is all they came up with. So it is anyone's wild guess about that. imo

The magistrate did say that in 3 of the lying charges the questions involved substantial ambiguity. And he dismissed those charges. The article also says FD was found not guilty of all 5 charges, so maybe it means the magistrate dismissed those 3 charges from serious consideration.

William Tyrrell’s foster father not guilty of lying to Crime Commission

Magistrate John Arms said some of the commission’s questions were vague and he could not be satisfied the man had knowingly given false or misleading answers.

www.smh.com.au

 

[JLZ]

Well, they had about a year of listening to the household and that is all they came up with. So it is anyone's wild guess about that. imo

The magistrate did say that in 3 of the lying charges the questions involved substantial ambiguity. And he dismissed those charges. The article also says FD was found not guilty of all 5 charges, so maybe it means the magistrate dismissed those 3 charges from serious consideration.

William Tyrrell’s foster father not guilty of lying to Crime Commission

Magistrate John Arms said some of the commission’s questions were vague and he could not be satisfied the man had knowingly given false or misleading answers.

www.smh.com.au

BBM. Found him not guilty, dismissed the charges: just different ways of saying the same thing. The ABC article says all five counts were dismissed. William Tyrrell's foster father found not guilty of lying to NSW Crime Commission

 

[JLZ]

Are any charges against the foster parents outstanding, still to be heard?

 

[JLZ]

Sounds to me that Magistrate John Arms may have taken into consideration that the recordings were never played to the FD at the NSWCC. He was not confronted with his knowledge of the assaults. Which would have cleared the "lying" matter up, right there and then. And not wasted the court's time and money.

Typically, judges are not keen on some police tactics. They also didn't like Jubes recording PS outside the warrant dates to protect himself from being accused of saying or not saying something wrong. imo

I'm typically not keen on police tactics either. But I suggest it's not reasonable to require the commission to present proof to the defendant and give him the opportunity to walk back his evidence before they can charge him with lying. He could basically lie about everything and then change his testimony only when caught, and nothing could be done.

 

[SouthAussie]

I'm typically not keen on police tactics either. But I suggest it's not reasonable to require the commission to present proof to the defendant and give him the opportunity to walk back his evidence before they can charge him with lying. He could basically lie about everything and then change his testimony only when caught, and nothing could be done.

And the result would be the same without the additional cost and time of this week's court hearing, is all I am saying.

I don't think magistrates/judges are generally supportive of frivolous charges. If the charges (ie: court time) could have been avoided by being upfront with the defendant about the evidence against them.

With a crowded court schedule and cases waiting and waiting to be heard, the magistrate may have a different opinion to yours.

imo

 

[JLZ]

And the result would be the same without the additional cost and time of this week's court hearing, is all I am saying.

I don't think magistrates/judges are generally supportive of frivolous charges. If the charges (ie: court time) could have been avoided by being upfront with the defendant about the evidence against them.

With a crowded court schedule and cases waiting and waiting to be heard, the magistrate may have a different opinion to yours.

imo

When I heard that he was charged of lying to the crime commission I thought (a) he probably didn't and (b) police had Buckley's of winning and would drop the charges before they went to court. I'm surprised the case was as strong as it was. That count about him saying he didn't remember that FFC kicked the child three weeks before had a fair chance of holding up. Personally I suspect he did lie.

I also condemn the police approach. The purpose of the questions was to get MFC to lie so as to prosecute him for it and increase the couple's stress. It wasn't to find out what happened to the child because they had the tapes and other evidence IIRC.

They have stuck on the same method all along. Guess what happened and bully their way to a confession; with the bribery of the reward thrown in, in the hope that in the midst of the crackpottery it provokes there will be something to fit the latest theory.

 

[SLouTh]

Are any charges against the foster parents outstanding, still to be heard?

IIRC, there is only the alleged assault / intimidation case to be concluded … and dates have been set for that.

IMO

 

[SLouTh]

I went back in the threads last night to see what was in Laura Beacroft's questionnaire that was passed out to the locals to document who was at their house when William disappeared. (And other information.)

The questionnaire asked specifically who was at their homes between 9:30 and 10:30am. 400 copies of the questionnaire were made and handed out in an effort to develop a more focused POI list.

We never were able to find all of the questions, so I wonder if people were asked who was at their home the previous night or left earlier that morning. And I wonder if anyone misrepresented some facts in their answers.

A few links about the questionnaire from previous posts ... Link and Link and Link

Thanks SA…. Yes I remember the survey… and I think it was a good strategy…

My point, was that perhaps the Police need to scrutinise, in detail, the movements of everyone in the area, and who, and what they saw, from the time from when the Foster Family arrived at FGM‘s the evening before, right up until when Rowley arrived at 11:06am after the 000 call ….

And for Police, and the Coroner, look in much more detail at all of the events that may have occurred in that time … rather than just a one hour window before the alarm was raised that William was missing ….(more than just from 09:30 - 10:30am, as in the survey)

This of course is just my opinion … and it certainly can’t hurt to go back and look at these details… as nothing after the 10:30am time frame has appeared to yield any results …

IMO

 

[Doesitmakesense]

When I heard that he was charged of lying to the crime commission I thought (a) he probably didn't and (b) police had Buckley's of winning and would drop the charges before they went to court. I'm surprised the case was as strong as it was. That count about him saying he didn't remember that FFC kicked the child three weeks before had a fair chance of holding up. Personally I suspect he did lie.

I also condemn the police approach. The purpose of the questions was to get MFC to lie so as to prosecute him for it and increase the couple's stress. It wasn't to find out what happened to the child because they had the tapes and other evidence IIRC.

They have stuck on the same method all along. Guess what happened and bully their way to a confession; with the bribery of the reward thrown in, in the hope that in the midst of the crackpottery it provokes there will be something to fit the latest theory.

BBM IMO I think this was a great idea. Not to prosecute them for it, but to see how easily the FP would lie. How hard did they defend their lies? Was their any similarities between their type of responses regarding this, and when giving statements and being questioned regarding WT. MOO

 

[SLouTh]

IMO, the only way he would not recall being told of the kicking just three weeks before, is if FFC had been constantly reporting similar evil attacks and it all merged together.

The only other possible explanation I can think of is that when the NSWCC were asking about “harm”, possibly to William, (initially it was about William ), and then another child… was that the FF was thinking of a type harm that was more sinister or nefarious? And possibly he didn’t consider the alleged assaults that occurred, to defined as “harm” ????

A long shot I know, and just my opinion….

 

[SLouTh]

to see how easily the FP would lie. How hard did they defend their lies? Was there any similarities between their type of responses regarding this, and when giving statements and being questioned regarding WT. MOO

BBM
You have raised a good point here….

I think the Police have succeeded in proving that “squeaky clean, good Christian family” image of the Fosters, that was initially portrayed in the media, and suggested by Fehon, was a fallacy …

And as you have suggested, it is now obvious that the Foster Carers are prepared to go to any length or expense to defend their lies and reputations … (I did think it was interesting that FF did not release a public statement, regarding the not guilty finding, like that of FM, but JMO)

However, during the process of doing this, the Police have ended up looking a little foolish, IMO, and have cost the public purse a lot more money for a nil result … and in doing so, have publicly acknowledged that they still have no idea what happened to William that day!

This, certainly, IMO, suggests that the Police strategy was yet again to put pressure on the Foster Carers to “break“ them and yield a confession. (like previous POI’s)
This too has failed miserably … IMO

I understand Police were trying to suggest a “propensity for harm“, in the pursuit of their actions … however, until they have sufficient evidence to prove the FM (still named as main POI, in the case) is responsible for what happened to William, then it is a rather a large leap….from lying and alleged assault, to manslaughter or whatever the nefarious case may be ….unless they can prove it … beyond reasonable doubt!


Roll on, the re-opening of the inquest!!!

Anyone willing to suggest what direction the inquest may take in March?? (Apart from the obvious reports from Police about investigations that have taken place in the interim…..) Or what way you would like to see it proceed??

All MOO

 

[k-mac]

BBM
You have raised a good point here….

I think the Police have succeeded in proving that “squeaky clean, good Christian family” image of the Fosters, that was initially portrayed in the media, and suggested by Fehon, was a fallacy …

And as you have suggested, it is now obvious that the Foster Carers are prepared to go to any length or expense to defend their lies and reputations … (I did think it was interesting that FF did not release a public statement, regarding the not guilty finding, like that of FM, but JMO)

However, during the process of doing this, the Police have ended up looking a little foolish, IMO, and have cost the public purse a lot more money for a nil result … and in doing so, have publicly acknowledged that they still have no idea what happened to William that day!

This, certainly, IMO, suggests that the Police strategy was yet again to put pressure on the Foster Carers to “break“ them and yield a confession. (like previous POI’s)
This too has failed miserably … IMO

I understand Police were trying to suggest a “propensity for harm“, in the pursuit of their actions … however, until they have sufficient evidence to prove the FM (still named as main POI, in the case) is responsible for what happened to William, then it is a rather a large leap….from lying and alleged assault, to manslaughter or whatever the nefarious case may be ….unless they can prove it … beyond reasonable doubt!


Roll on, the re-opening of the inquest!!!

Anyone willing to suggest what direction the inquest may take in March?? (Apart from the obvious reports from Police about investigations that have taken place in the interim…..) Or what way you would like to see it proceed??

All MOO

good question slouth.

I would like to see the previous 24 hours put under the microscope.
Official alibi time lines are always shortened in nefarious circumstances.

I would also like to see any previous foster children and their bio families experiences brought to the table.

 

[SLouTh]

Are any charges against the foster parents outstanding, still to be heard?

IIRC, there is only the alleged assault / intimidation case to be concluded … and dates have been set for that.

IMO

IIRC, December 4th was the date set down for concluding summaries to be delivered in this case before Magistrate McIntyre, with findings to be delivered early 2024.
IMO