Australia Australia - William Tyrrell Disappeared While Playing in Yard - Kendall (NSW) #79

[iiiii's]

I just listened to episode 4 of Witness.

Dan Box and his producer time how long it takes to drive to the riding school and back to dispose of William and estimate 26 minutes.

We know the mother took the drive to the riding school but did not tell the police for 6 days, did not tell her husband when he arrived home, and did not tell the person she spoke to on the 000 call.

Her behaviour between around 9.40am and 10.30am is so so suspicious.

Why did she tell her husband that “William was here 5 minutes ago” when she has already been in grandmas car for 30 minutes? Why did she delete his text when he said “home in5”? Why did she tell 000 call receiver he may have been missing for 5-20 minutes when it was clearly an hour ago that she went for the drive? Why did she say there were no cars around then change her story to 2 suspicious cars much later.

With all of these things I can’t get past her guilt of something- otherwise why do all of the above???? Something smells and Laidlaw can smell it IMO.

The most difficult part of this for me to comprehend is the lack of corroboration on many of the things she said just before and just after WT went missing, by her mother. There are things the FM has said repeatedly in interviews about interacting with her mother and things that the FGM replied back to her that the FGM does not corroborate. I wish we were given an explanation as to why that is. There is no corroboration for the cars across the road, She believes she does the drive after her husband has returned yet others statements do not support that. She believes she went to the neighbour's house before her husband returned (with her mother saying, "you go down and I'll wait here" and yet it seems she went after her husband had returned and her mother had no idea that WT was missing at that point. Her 5 minutes before realising he is missing seems to be substantially longer. It's a lot to get mixed up at a crucial time and yet I can see how a lot could be put down to shock from personal experience, blocks of time just disappearing and then coming back in the days, weeks that follow. That and the mind creating things based on wondering what had happened to WT. I believe she saw at least one car, (the white station wagon) possibly on a previous visit, as someone had seen a car like that on the street prior to the abduction and we know a car of that description has been parked on the street since the abduction. So I'm torn. Something as you say has "smelled" since day one to me in regards to FM and yet there is the ring of truth to me that there could be some type of shock present. So what is she shocked about? Shocked that she finds him dead? Shocked that he has disappeared and can't locate him and fears abduction? Shocked that she has accidently killed him? MOO

 

[SLouTh]

I just listened to episode 4 of Witness.

Dan Box and his producer time how long it takes to drive to the riding school and back to dispose of William and estimate 26 minutes.

We know the mother took the drive to the riding school but did not tell the police for 6 days, did not tell her husband when he arrived home, and did not tell the person she spoke to on the 000 call.

Her behaviour between around 9.40am and 10.30am is so so suspicious.

Why did she tell her husband that “William was here 5 minutes ago” when she has already been in grandmas car for 30 minutes? Why did she delete his text when he said “home in5”? Why did she tell 000 call receiver he may have been missing for 5-20 minutes when it was clearly an hour ago that she went for the drive? Why did she say there were no cars around then change her story to 2 suspicious cars much later.

With all of these things I can’t get past her guilt of something- otherwise why do all of the above???? Something smells and Laidlaw can smell it IMO.

Dan’s take on the timeline is quite interesting ….. as he has William driven and disposed of by 10:00am, and has the “missing period of 5-10 minutes” occurring just after the 09:37photos….

Where as the assumption has previously been … FM returned just before 10:30am (as per the CO version) where she runs back inside and sees the text message from FF ….


“So let's say five minutes for playing the dice, for William getting bored, for running off and back, for playing Daddy Tiger, being told, can you see daddy's car? And the foster mother realizing she can't hear him.

So the minimum estimate that she gives, so five minutes, if the photo was at 9.37, it's now 9.42. And on our timer, we've been six and a bit minutes.”

From Witness: William Tyrrell: The Police Theory | 4, 28 Oct 2024

The Police Theory | 4

Podcast Episode · Witness: William Tyrrell · S2 E4 · 48m

podcasts.apple.com

“And at some point, according to the police theory, she walked up to the carport just here around the house.

And when she got there, she loaded William's body into her mum's gray Mazda 3, according to the police. So, so far, we are at 11 minutes since the time when William is last known to be alive.”

From Witness: William Tyrrell: The Police Theory | 4, 28 Oct 2024

The Police Theory | 4

Podcast Episode · Witness: William Tyrrell · S2 E4 · 48m

podcasts.apple.com

“So, she says she drives up here, she tells police, she brings the car back up, and she just runs out, and she looks for him again, and she's running around. So how long have we been? We've been 26 minutes, so if William was last seen at 9.37, that's about 10 o'clock now.”

From Witness: William Tyrrell: The Police Theory | 4, 28 Oct 2024

The Police Theory | 4

Podcast Episode · Witness: William Tyrrell · S2 E4 · 48m

podcasts.apple.com

Thoughts???

IMO

 

[nightrider17]

The only thing that might change that timeline SLouTH is there was mention that the car bonnet was still warm and so was the tea? when the first constables arrived after the 000 call. Just my remembering of the situation. IMO
I will try to see if I can find that ??? Might mean that the car drive was closer to 10.30???

 

[nightrider17]

https://www.news.com.au/national/courts-law/the-day-william-tyrrell-vanished/news-story/c3b76e8d4fc18401ebc17df61f45a62d

Sometime before 10.30am, William’s foster mother retreated from the outdoors inside to make a cup of tea for her and her mother.

 

[SLouTh]

The only thing that might change that timeline SLouTH is there was mention that the car bonnet was still warm and so was the tea? when the first constables arrived after the 000 call. Just my remembering of the situation. IMO
I will try to see if I can find that ??? Might mean that the car drive was closer to 10.30???

Yes … agree …. As, if as suggested by Dan Box, the drive was complete by 10:00am ….. what occurred during the 10 - 10:30am timeframe within the timeline that morning ???

It’s obviously just a theory proposed by DB, that leaves no explanation for the following half an hour before FF arrived back at FGM house ….

I find it interesting that he brings the FM version of William “missing for 5 - 10 minutes back to occurring just after 09:37am …. (Rather than the 10:25-10:30am timeline assumed by the FF text message and the 000 call…..)

“She tells the police that the gap between the photograph being taken of William and her going to look for William was maybe five, 10 minutes. But she's questioned on this at different times by the police and she's inconsistent on exactly how long it was. And at one point the police actually ask her, they say sometimes five minutes doesn't always feel like five minutes, which is fair.”

From Witness: William Tyrrell: The Police Theory | 4, 28 Oct 2024

The Police Theory | 4

Podcast Episode · Witness: William Tyrrell · S2 E4 · 48m

podcasts.apple.com

I would like to know where this timeline information came from??? And also DB’s explanation for the time between 10:00 and 10:30am????


IMO

 

[LolaAngelina]

The podcast seems to be very popular. Well done Dan!

 

[JLZ]

Yes … agree …. As, if as suggested by Dan Box, the drive was complete by 10:00am ….. what occurred during the 10 - 10:30am timeframe within the timeline that morning ???

It’s obviously just a theory proposed by DB, that leaves no explanation for the following half an hour before FF arrived back at FGM house ….

I find it interesting that he brings the FM version of William “missing for 5 - 10 minutes back to occurring just after 09:37am …. (Rather than the 10:25-10:30am timeline assumed by the FF text message and the 000 call…..)

“She tells the police that the gap between the photograph being taken of William and her going to look for William was maybe five, 10 minutes. But she's questioned on this at different times by the police and she's inconsistent on exactly how long it was. And at one point the police actually ask her, they say sometimes five minutes doesn't always feel like five minutes, which is fair.”

From Witness: William Tyrrell: The Police Theory | 4, 28 Oct 2024

The Police Theory | 4

Podcast Episode · Witness: William Tyrrell · S2 E4 · 48m

podcasts.apple.com

I would like to know where this timeline information came from??? And also DB’s explanation for the time between 10:00 and 10:30am????


IMO

Is he intentionally representing the police case in a way that makes it look silly? Or is his point that she had half an hour spare along the way to dig a grave or whatever? Or is the idea that FFC disposed of William, came back and calmly took tea, and represented the disappearance--to FGM and others--as happening rather later than it did? To give herself an alibi, except that FGM was so vague it didn't work.

 

[SouthAussie]

Is he intentionally representing the police case in a way that makes it look silly? Or is his point that she had half an hour spare along the way to dig a grave or whatever? Or is the idea that FFC disposed of William, came back and calmly took tea, and represented the disappearance--to FGM and others--as happening rather later than it did? To give herself an alibi, except that FGM was so vague it didn't work.

The timeline has always been a huge problem for some of us. And not in the minutia that some are scrutinising. But in the fact that for a child who disappeared between those proof of life photos and the 000 phone call at 10:57, the time is VERY short for a coverup by 4 people that has lasted for 10 years. And very short for a 'guilty party' to call the police.

It is not a bad thing that Dan is pointing this out through his podcast. Especially when there are so many others questioning the latest police direction.

That now infamous 'we know where, we know how, we know why' obviously just isn't true.

imo

​

 

[Wexford]

The timeline has always been a huge problem for some of us. And not in the minutia that some are scrutinising. But in the fact that for a child who disappeared between those proof of life photos and the 000 phone call at 10:57, the time is VERY short for a coverup by 4 people that has lasted for 10 years. And very short for a 'guilty party' to call the police.

It is not a bad thing that Dan is pointing this out through his podcast. Especially when there are so many others questioning the latest police direction.

That now infamous 'we know where, we know how, we know why' obviously just isn't true.

imo

​

BBM: Yes, I imagine that line will haunt for some time.

 

[Eloise]

The timeline has always been a huge problem for some of us. And not in the minutia that some are scrutinising. But in the fact that for a child who disappeared between those proof of life photos and the 000 phone call at 10:57, the time is VERY short for a coverup by 4 people that has lasted for 10 years. And very short for a 'guilty party' to call the police.

It is not a bad thing that Dan is pointing this out through his podcast. Especially when there are so many others questioning the latest police direction.

That now infamous 'we know where, we know how, we know why' obviously just isn't true.

imo

​

this, exactly. I know the FM looks sus. I know she's had other legal troubles and issues with the other child. Certainly, and this is just my opinion fwiw but she's never endeared herself to me at all. But I just don't in any way see how she could possibly have done anything or covered up anything. Its such a tiny, tiny amount of time to do what she's been (not formally) accused of doing by LE and leave no discernible trace for so long. I've been on WS long enough now to know that when parents or husbands or whoever try and cover up a murder or accidental death that'll make them look bad, they give themselves a pretty significant amount of time before they contact LE - usually at least many hours or even the next day, occasionally longer. And then, they're generally found out easily because its actually not that easy to cover such a thing up. Just my 2c but I refuse to believe she's a criminal genius mastermind who is that good at hiding a body for the short amount of time she had. Unless there's some other crucial missing piece of the puzzle, as the facts stand for us right now, my opinion is, it was not the foster parents in any way.

 

[iiiii's]

I think every conceivable theory around the FM should be explored as out of all the unlikely possibilities, she is the most obvious possibility for how this child disappeared. Are we only able to explore the published police theory of accidental death and hiding WT's body. What about a prearranged meeting with someone who either arrived at the house at the time the Crabbs heard a car come up Benaroon Dr. that helped take WT away and rehome him somewhere, or the FM gathering WT up at a particular time and meeting someone a couple of km down the road to pass him on to rehome him?MOO

 

[SouthAussie]

I think every conceivable theory around the FM should be explored as out of all the unlikely possibilities, she is the most obvious possibility for how this child disappeared. Are we only able to explore the published police theory of accidental death and hiding WT's body. What about a prearranged meeting with someone who either arrived at the house at the time the Crabbs heard a car come up Benaroon Dr. that helped take WT away and rehome him somewhere, or the FM gathering WT up at a particular time and meeting someone a couple of km down the road to pass him on to rehome him?MOO

You may want to check with a mod, but I am pretty sure that any speculation has to be based on fact.


Websleuths is fact based. Rumors and conspiracy theories are not allowed. Do not link to them and do not mention them.
Etiquette & Information

 

[iiiii's]

DBM

 

[iiiii's]

You may want to check with a mod, but I am pretty sure that any speculation has to be based on fact.


Websleuths is fact based. Rumors and conspiracy theories are not allowed. Do not link to them and do not mention them.
Etiquette & Information

Sure, however going back to my link in post 73, it seems the police had more than one theory around the FM knowing where WT is.

In court, one of the detectives, Andrew Lonergan, said “We believe (William’s body) was disposed” near the house in Kendall, on the Mid North Coast of NSW, where William was reported missing on 12 September 2014.

Police suspect the three-year-old died after falling from the house’s veranda, that his foster mother discovered him, and she chose to conceal this by putting his body in her mother’s grey Mazda 3 for the two-minute drive to the crossroads of Batar Creek Road and Cobb & Co Road.

“That was one of the theories, yes,” Mr Lonergan said in court in 2022.

“I’ve formed the view that (the foster mother) knows where William Tyrrell is,”
he told the court.
https://www.news.com.au/national/cr...d/news-story/10eea04ebb4e42406c4ca6561ae81ee8

 

[butterstick]

Is he intentionally representing the police case in a way that makes it look silly?

I believe there is a bit of this going on. Demonstrable by the fact he interweaves stories about police mismanagement in amongst his trip to time the drive to Cobb & Co Road. Those stories about police mismanagement are very important, but they do not relate to William/Cobb & Co Road story directly. These could of been told separately. I believe he has interwoven these two narratives deliberately.

And their treatment of Cobb & Co Road seems overly narrow to me. They are treating it as the definitive trip to hiding evidence, when very obviously there is a possibility of followup. So this obsession over hiding evidence within 30minutes that holds up for years is possibly false - it may only need to hold up for hours/days.

I still like the podcast a lot, but at this point everything feels like echos in a cave.

 

[SouthAussie]

I still like the podcast a lot, but at this point everything feels like echos in a cave.

It probably doesn't sound like echoes in a cave to others who have not followed this case as closely as we have.
And the bits by Michelle and Ben were new.

I think Dan is producing this podcast for the general public. Which is why news.com.au has been featuring it each week. And, so far, it is hitting spot #2 in the latest podcast rankings.

imo

 

[butterstick]

It probably doesn't sound like echoes in a cave to others who have not followed this case as closely as we have.
And the bits by Michelle and Ben were new.

I think Dan is producing this podcast for the general public. Which is why news.com.au has been featuring it each week. And, so far, it is hitting spot #2 in the latest podcast rankings.

imo

Yeah good points, it certainly is getting attention.

I like his style a lot. Not such a fan of News.com.au, having worked for them, but Dan seems quite independent.

 

[LolaAngelina]

I believe there is a bit of this going on. Demonstrable by the fact he interweaves stories about police mismanagement in amongst his trip to time the drive to Cobb & Co Road. Those stories about police mismanagement are very important, but they do not relate to William/Cobb & Co Road story directly. These could of been told separately. I believe he has interwoven these two narratives deliberately.

And their treatment of Cobb & Co Road seems overly narrow to me. They are treating it as the definitive trip to hiding evidence, when very obviously there is a possibility of followup. So this obsession over hiding evidence within 30minutes that holds up for years is possibly false - it may only need to hold up for hours/days.

I still like the podcast a lot, but at this point everything feels like echos in a cave.

BBM why is that obvious? Police have never stated that and Dan was just recreating that time period

 

[iiiii's]

You may want to check with a mod, but I am pretty sure that any speculation has to be based on fact.


Websleuths is fact based. Rumors and conspiracy theories are not allowed. Do not link to them and do not mention them.
Etiquette & Information

No rumors nor conspiracy theories here, my theory is based upon the following facts: The FM is a POI due to her uncorroborated evidence, she followed a child to wards the last place he was seen. Due to her evidence it seems she left the property at a time when no one else at the household knew the child was missing. The disappearance co-incides with the Crabbs hearing a vehicle come up Benaroon Dr. and turn at 10.05 and this is the time Louise Beacroft? thinks he went missing. The only other person to talk about a car coming up that section of Benaroon Dr. is the FM, but according to her it was earlier in the morning, she also had no description of the driver and then it changes to a very detailed description of the driver and the colour of the car changed from grey/green to teal. If her times were out on when WT went missing, when she took her mum's car and when she went to AMS, then I tend to think this time was incorrect as well. Neither her mother nor the other child corroborate that vehicle in their statements even though (according to FM) one commented on it and apparently 3 people. two adults, one child saw it. Maybe only WT and FM saw this vehicle. MOO

 

[butterstick]

BBM why is that obvious? Police have never stated that and Dan was just recreating that time period

Yeah I see your point.

If someone is new to the case, and listening to this podcast that has promoted itself as correcting years of looser information - then the way it's presented feels like "right, well the police are incompetent, and the timeline for hiding evidence in this tiny window is very very tight, and let's talk some more about unrelated police incompetence"

A new person listening might be forgiven for thinking everything needed to be wrapped up in 30 minutes or so based on the narrow focus of the podcast.

It's possible the evidence only needed to be hidden well enough to conceal it from the initial search area / search party, and to not be noticed by passing cars - to be dealt with later and put in a more secure location. Not comparatively big ask for a 30 minute trip.

The companion article states the purpose of the drive in dot points:

• Drive to the crossroads
• Dispose of William’s body. There is no evidence of any digging tools being in the car, and the bush here is hard to walk through. Subsequent searches are not known to have recovered any evidence,
• Drive back to the house,

Yes the second dot point sounds impossible. But only if you are hiding the evidence in that location for a decade, rather than temporarily.

My point is - the premise of this podcast episodes is all based on very shallow, scant understanding of what the police theory actually is, and they are getting a lot of mileage out of that