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

[Chrissy74]

I think the inquest has spent considerable time looking at FA. I don't think the Coroner takes the evidence against him lightly. Remember when she (presumably) ordered the search of his residence location DURING the inquest?

I agree that NSWPOL have not spent nearly enough time on him. In one of Jubes' books he said that they couldn't place FA at Benaroon Drive. But it seems that they haven't been able to place him NOT at Benaroon Drive either.

I think it is very suss that FA's phone didn't move for 3 days when William disappeared. A person with as much form as him would know that the police look at your phone movements. Where was he during those 3 days?

Wasn’t GJ certain PS was somehow involved in Ws disappearance. Even til today I think that’s his belief. He lost his job and his career over his determination to prove PS was responsible. I’m confused SthAussie do you think it’s PS or FA or GO or some creepy random thief? Or possibly any one of the above but definitely not fm

The inquest didn't hear testimony from a memory expert for no reason.

i realise that. But what about the facts SthAussie? And the facts show that those cars fm says were parked in the street weren’t there. The facts show that the time she says W disappeared was not that time at all. The facts show that the drive fm took that morning was not the time she claims it was. The facts show that fgm was not outside with her as the kids rode their bikes. The facts show that the picture she painted of the perfect little family, everything was normal and W was a happy little boy was not the case at all. These are the facts regardless of her memory and version of events. So either multiple witnesses are lying and fm is the only person telling the truth OR fm is lying and that’s evident when taking into account witness statements and information/evidence obtained over the course of the investigation.

 

[marv hucker]

So either … OR …

I reject “either/OR” as a premise.

She can be _both_ imperfect of memory and not have murdered him.
Human memories aren’t perfect.

 

[marv hucker]

I think the inquest has spent considerable time looking at FA. I don't think the Coroner takes the evidence against him lightly. Remember when she (presumably) ordered the search of his residence location DURING the inquest?

I agree that NSWPOL have not spent nearly enough time on him. In one of Jubes' books he said that they couldn't place FA at Benaroon Drive. But it seems that they haven't been able to place him NOT at Benaroon Drive either.

I think it is very suss that FA's phone didn't move for 3 days when William disappeared. A person with as much form as him would know that the police look at your phone movements. Where was he during those 3 days?

I believe the extent of the coroner’s powers is to instruct police to investigate, though?


Unlikely for Police to throw down their “not bluffing” hand (3 & 7 off suit + expired Video Ezy membership card) at this point.

 

[drsleuth]

Wasn’t GJ certain PS was somehow involved in Ws disappearance. Even til today I think that’s his belief. He lost his job and his career over his determination to prove PS was responsible. I’m confused SthAussie do you think it’s PS or FA or GO or some creepy random thief? Or possibly any one of the above but definitely not fm

To me it shows that

i realise that. But what about the facts SthAussie? And the facts show that those cars fm says were parked in the street weren’t there. The facts show that the time she says W disappeared was not that time at all. The facts show that the drive fm took that morning was not the time she claims it was. The facts show that fgm was not outside with her as the kids rode their bikes. The facts show that the picture she painted of the perfect little family, everything was normal and W was a happy little boy was not the case at all. These are the facts regardless of her memory and version of events. So either multiple witnesses are lying and fm is the only person telling the truth OR fm is lying and that’s evident when taking into account witness statements and information/evidence obtained over the course of the investigation.

BBM: Do you have links / evidence / witness testimony to backup your facts??

Just because no one saw the cars ( any cars for that matter ) does not mean they weren't there.

Not sure how you come to the fact that the FGM was not outside when the kids were riding their bikes?

Or when the FFC said her drive was?

Just because people's "stories / memories " change over time does not automatically mean they are lying either.

The old saying "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is very true.

IMO

Bring on the findings!

 

[BoysTown]

I’ve been listening to the ‘Witness’ podcast again.

Can anyone explain why Frank Abbott is allowed to have all the evidence from the inquest?

My apologies if this has been covered.

 

[SouthAussie]

I’ve been listening to the ‘Witness’ podcast again.

Can anyone explain why Frank Abbott is allowed to have all the evidence from the inquest?

My apologies if this has been covered.

I think it is because he is deemed to be an "interested party".

This is a Vic link (it was easier to quickly find) ... but I think way back in the threads there are NSW links to the same information.


Interested parties are also allowed access to the inquest brief prepared by police. This is very important in trying to assess whether, potentially, criminal charges may be faced at a later point.

There are several types of relationships that might give rise to sufficient interest and therefore allow a person to attend as an interested party. Obvious examples include:

• A person or persons closely related to the deceased
• The employer of a person killed in the course of employment
• Any person who may have caused or contributed to the death
• Any person who may reasonably anticipate that the coroner may make a finding adverse to their interests

What is an Interested Party at a Coronial Inquest

What is an interested party at a coronial inquest? Call Doogue + George on 03 9670 5111 -Melbourne's Corporate Crime Specialists.

www.criminal-lawyers.com.au

 

[drsleuth]

I’ve been listening to the ‘Witness’ podcast again.

Can anyone explain why Frank Abbott is allowed to have all the evidence from the inquest?

My apologies if this has been covered.

Because he was an Interested Party to the proceedings ( Ie POI / Suspect ) IMO

And because he chose to represent himself ( on CCTV from jail ) , he was able to cross examine any witnesses, which he certainly did - well more gave statements than ask questions most of the time, much to the testing of the Coroner's patience at times, who kept saying to him that his time will come to " tell his story " , but it never did. I don't know why. It's a mystery.

We were supposed to hear from him in the last days of Taree, but the last 2 days were cancelled due to Covid ( March 2020 )

I often wonder what course things would have taken had we sat those 2 days?

He had/has the whole brief.

Interested parties

If you have a legitimate interest in a coronial investigation in NSW you must first register with the Court. You can then be kept informed at key stages.

coroners.nsw.gov.au

 

[BoysTown]

Thank you South Aussie and Drsleuth.

So I’m assuming other people would have been given these files too? Like the FM and Paul Savage?

 

[drsleuth]

Thank you South Aussie and Drsleuth.

So I’m assuming other people would have been given these files too? Like the FM and Paul Savage?

Other interested parties had legal representation ie FP's & PS, who would have had the brief, weather that was shared with them I don't know.

I know one interested party was "sharing" it around

 

[Karin1974]

To answer your question Karin yes I do believe fm is 100% responsible for Ws disappearance. I’ve said this before, there is plenty of evidence just not enough admissible evidence to press charges unfortunately. Even if Ws body was found it would still be a huge challenge for police to prove she was responsible. Is she the type of person who’s capable of hurting a child? Yes and she plead guilty to assault charges on a child. Did she hurt W that morning? To say yes would be pure speculation.? As for your question on the fm being clever enough to pull this off, to that I say yes however mistakes made by police and FACS controlling the media certainly put her at an advantage. Her best friend talks to DB about how smart fm is. She’s a successful woman in her own right and that wouldn’t be the case if she wasn’t savvy and smart. I also don’t believe that fm is the only person who knows what happened to W. Both ff and fgm would have known but as if her own mother and husband would throw her under the bus. There’s a very long list of contradictions, lies and story telling that can’t simply be ignored. Fm painted a picture on the very first day and over days weeks months and years that picture was chopped and changed multiple times to suit the circumstances at the time.

JMO

IMO - I respectfully, simply don’t buy it. She acted exactly how I imagine most people who lose children act. (Even if they’re only missing momentarily.) Which was frantic & panicked & because of those two emotions, I believe it’s easy to become forgetful of what’s just happened, yes, even forget that drive that wasn’t mentioned until later. In the very beginning, I took a hard look at FM & thought perhaps there was a chance, but logical thinking concluded for me that everyone has missed what really happened that day & more people needed as big of a spotlight shone on them as FM has. MOO

 

[Karin1974]

I really dont know. I dont think if she is responsible it was intentional. I do believe she is narcissistic though. So i don’t believe anything she says.

I think the problem (among many) is that she should never have been cleared from the beginning, what hard evidence rules her out?

I wouldnt put my house on it that shes guilty, but generally the last person to see the person alive is responsible, so i do think she is the front runner.

IMO - What hard evidence rules her in? MOO

 

[Chrissy74]

IMO - I respectfully, simply don’t buy it. She acted exactly how I imagine most people who lose children act. (Even if they’re only missing momentarily.) Which was frantic & panicked & because of those two emotions, I believe it’s easy to become forgetful of what’s just happened, yes, even forget that drive that wasn’t mentioned until later. In the very beginning, I took a hard look at FM & thought perhaps there was a chance, but logical thinking concluded for me that everyone has missed what really happened that day & more people needed as big of a spotlight shone on them as FM has. MOO

IMO respectfully what most educated parents would do in that situation is first and foremost set up their children around them with a bunch of their favourite toys to play with, allowing them to relax while they have a cuppa and chatt and watch their kids at the same time. Most parents would tell their toddlers to play or run up and down the backyard where they are in full site and not around the side of the house which leads to an open road and a 5m drop balcony. No wonder W was bored. His sister was set up happily drawing with her pram to her right and toy (W Spider-Man toy) wrapped in blanket to her left. What did W have to play with other than a piece of paper and a crayon? No boys toys like building blocks, farm animals, soccer balls, picture books. Nothing. How many little boys want to sit and colour in? That scenario shows me an accident waiting to happen. Accidents happen when kids are bored, especially 3yo boys. And IMO that’s exactly what happened .Fm knew W was getting restless when she went inside and made cups of tea but didn’t even think to bring out any toys for W to play with and entertain himself. As the saying goes “a picture is worth a thousand words”

 

[SouthAussie]

And because he chose to represent himself ( on CCTV from jail ) , he was able to cross examine any witnesses, which he certainly did - well more gave statements than ask questions most of the time, much to the testing of the Coroner's patience at times, who kept saying to him that his time will come to " tell his story " , but it never did. I don't know why. It's a mystery.

My theory about why FA didn't testify is because (I think) he wanted a Sec 61 certificate before he testified, and the Coroner wouldn't grant him one.

By the time he was set to testify, he had already heard a lot of circumstantial evidence against him from a variety of witnesses. And he knew the location of his residence had now been searched. That may have been enough for him to request a Sec 61 ... if it looked to him like he may have been heading for a criminal prosecution in William's disappearance.

I read in a publication yesterday that a person can only be compelled to speak at an inquest if the Coroner will grant them a Sec 61 if they want one. (IMO .... will look for the link again and add it. ETA link added in next post.)



a) evidence given by a person in respect of which a certificate under this section has been given, and
(b) evidence of any information, document or thing obtained as a direct or indirect consequence of the person having given evidence,

cannot be used against the person.

CORONERS ACT 2009 - SECT 61 Privilege in respect of self-incrimination

classic.austlii.edu.au

 

[SouthAussie]

Here is a link about being compelled to speak at an inquest, and the part a Sec 61 certificate plays if the Coroner grants one ...... (as per previous post)

Possibly a good chance that FA wanted one, and it was denied. So he didn't testify. imo



"Under section 58(2) of the Coroners Act, a witness cannot be compelled to answer any question or provide a document that may tend to incriminate them or expose them to a civil penalty.
This provision, however, is subject to section 61 of the Coroners Act which sets out the process by which the Coroner may compel a witness to give evidence with the protection of a "certificate".

When a witness is granted a Section 61 Certificate, the evidence that the witness gives cannot be used against them in future proceedings in New South Wales, except for criminal proceedings relating to perjury."

Coronial proceedings and the operation of "section... | Clayton Utz

Section 6 of the Coroners Act 2009 (NSW) provides that the purpose of coronial proceedings are to determine the cause and manner of death when a person dies under suspicious, unnatural, or unknown circumstances. The Coroner has exclusive jurisdiction in relation to certain types of death...

www.claytonutz.com

 

[JBowie]

Possibly a good chance that FA wanted one, and it was denied. So he didn't testify. imo

Any such testimony would have been a litany of lies, IMO.

 

[SouthAussie]

Any such testimony would have been a litany of lies, IMO.

Yep, agreed. Then he might have been subject to perjury charges. imo

As well as possibly criminal charges for involvement in William's disappearance. I wonder if he knew they couldn't find anything in the bush around his residence. Or if that was kept hush-hush at the time.

 

[drsleuth]

Yep, agreed. Then he might have been subject to perjury charges. imo

As well as possibly criminal charges for involvement in William's disappearance. I wonder if he knew they couldn't find anything in the bush around his residence. Or if that was kept hush-hush at the time.

BBM : Don't think he would really care. He's in until he's dead. It's all about control IMO

I imagine he likes the power, especially ,that he got to cross examine all his old acquaintances & try to throw mud on / at them.

It was very clear from his statements ( there weren't to many questions ) that he had poured over the brief.

He should have been one of the first Taree witnesses IMO, before anyone else got give their evidence.

I imagine he knew of the searches at the time ( I'm sure MP would have told him in their many phone calls the had ) , not the result thou IMO

There was no mention of the searches at the inquest & I had no clue they were being carried out at the time, until I read here or saw on MSM

 

[drsleuth]

IMO respectfully what most educated parents would do in that situation is first and foremost set up their children around them with a bunch of their favourite toys to play with, allowing them to relax while they have a cuppa and chatt and watch their kids at the same time. Most parents would tell their toddlers to play or run up and down the backyard where they are in full site and not around the side of the house which leads to an open road and a 5m drop balcony. No wonder W was bored. His sister was set up happily drawing with her pram to her right and toy (W Spider-Man toy) wrapped in blanket to her left. What did W have to play with other than a piece of paper and a crayon? No boys toys like building blocks, farm animals, soccer balls, picture books. Nothing. How many little boys want to sit and colour in? That scenario shows me an accident waiting to happen. Accidents happen when kids are bored, especially 3yo boys. And IMO that’s exactly what happened .Fm knew W was getting restless when she went inside and made cups of tea but didn’t even think to bring out any toys for W to play with and entertain himself. As the saying goes “a picture is worth a thousand words”

Is your opinion based on just the few photos you have seen??

 

[JBowie]

It's all about control IMO

Yep, he would be high on Hare's Checklist methinks.

Psychopathy Checklist - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[FromGermany1]

When seeing the photos of little W and sis on the deck in Kendall, something is indeed baffling: FFC wanted to document the bio sibling's life for the (same) bio parents and the children themselves as requested by the Children Welfare organisation. On the known photos there is slightly bad mooded W always in the front and his peaceful bio sister in the background. - Short time after taking photos, exactly that child in the front (quasi the main person) has disappeared from the earth's surface.