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

[marv hucker]

They didn't say they were not bluffing as far as I am aware to the media, they said it to a suspect.

<modsnip - personalizing>

2GB, 16 November 2021.
The clip’s been replayed ad nauseum.

“We aren’t guessing, we aren’t bluffing”

“We know why, we know how, we know where he is.”

https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/courts-law/how-foster-mother-became-the-focus-of-the-william-tyrrell-investigation/news-story/2945626eb390eab1a09aeb0d3ad27e6a?amp

EDITED to add link.

Now, either they were telling the truth, in which case they’re incompetent - or they were lying. Their language doesn’t really leave any middle ground.

 

[iiiii's]

?? Never heard of a victim/alleged victim not pressing charges?
Happens lots.
For many different reasons, of course, not all of them good.

And yes, victim impact is definitely taken into account for sentencing for many crimes. Sometimes through testimony, other times through victim impact statements.

That is true however when police already have evidence of the incident they do not need the victim to make a statement. There are also many instances of people not wanting to press charges however there is an eyewitness and police undertake to press the charges anyway. It's up to police discretion.

 

[iiiii's]

I find it unbelievable you haven’t come across it.

2GB, 16 November 2021.
The clip’s been replayed ad nauseum.

“We aren’t guessing, we aren’t bluffing”

“We know why, we know how, we know where he is.”

https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/courts-law/how-foster-mother-became-the-focus-of-the-william-tyrrell-investigation/news-story/2945626eb390eab1a09aeb0d3ad27e6a?amp

EDITED to add link.

Now, either they were telling the truth, in which case they’re incompetent - or they were lying. Their language doesn’t really leave any middle ground.

I stand by my previous post. Police did not make that announcement to the media. The media are reporting on what police said to a suspect in a recording they heard in court proceedings. Maybe you posted the wrong link to prove your point, instead, the link you have posted, proves my point. Happy to be corrected if you have a different link with a police rep, stating that to the media.
Perhaps you meant to give this link associated with 2GB 16/11/21. There is no mention of that statement to the media in the interview. Police looking at 'one person in particular' in William Tyrrell case
<modsnip - personalizing>

 

[marv hucker]

I stand by my previous post. Police did not make that announcement to the media. The media are reporting on what police said to a suspect in a recording they heard in court proceedings. Maybe you posted the wrong link to prove your point, instead, the link you have posted, proves my point. Happy to be corrected if you have a different link with a police rep, stating that to the media.
Perhaps you meant to give this link associated with 2GB 16/11/21. There is no mention of that statement to the media in the interview. Police looking at 'one person in particular' in William Tyrrell case

<modsnip - personalizing>

The clip is literally the police commissioner talking to a presenter on radio, isn’t it?
not second hand or third hand.
EDIT - I stand corrected on this. It was a well reported transcript of an interview. I had wires crossed with the “one particular person” quote.

Doesn’t take away from my overall point, though.
They’ve made their bed and they’re continuing to lie in it. We’re a decade down the track with zero evidence, zero theory on motive and the absolute disinterest of the coronial inquest in their story.
I wouldn’t expect _anything_ to dissuade them at this point. It would embarrass too many very senior cops.

 

[Chrissy74]

The clip is literally the police commissioner talking to a presenter on radio, isn’t it?
not second hand or third hand.
EDIT - I stand corrected on this. It was a well reported transcript of an interview. I had wires crossed with the “one particular person” quote.

Doesn’t take away from my overall point, though.
They’ve made their bed and they’re continuing to lie in it. We’re a decade down the track with zero evidence, zero theory on motive and the absolute disinterest of the coronial inquest in their story.
I wouldn’t expect _anything_ to dissuade them at this point. It would embarrass too many very senior cops.

The FM shares equal responsibility for Ws disappearance, just as much as the police share responsibility for not locating him. Over the past ten years, the FM has never once taken accountability for what occurred that morning. Not once. She has, however, mentioned that she could “kick herself” for failing to jot down the number plates of the suspicious cars she “supposedly” saw, yet she has never expressed any remorse for the decisions she made that morning, decisions that led to disastrous consequences. There’s no valid reason why the FM wouldn’t have been aware of the dangers a 3-year-old could face at Fgm house. She would have been fully aware of the risks involved. The state forest was practically right next door, the front and backyards were unfenced, the side of the house opened directly to an exposed road, and the 5-meter-high balcony had a gate that could be easily opened and accessed ” in fact, it was found open during the walkthrough. Yet, the FM insists that there was no reason not to feel safe at Nana’s house. Common sense would argue otherwise. Had the property been fully fenced, making it difficult for a child to wander off, the chances of W disappearing would have been significantly reduced, and the police could have devoted their time and resources to other leads. Minimise the facts all you like but the facts still remain.The FP had a reasonable duty of care to ensure the safety and well-being of W and his sister, and they failed to uphold that responsibility for both children.
Oh and now we have ff appealing his sentence on intimidation charges on the basis that he was unaware that his behaviour was causing the child to feel fearful. This couple are completely irresponsible. Time and time again I see no accountability by the fp for their actions but the consequences of those actions speak louder than their words. They have no right to care for any children whatsoever under any circumstances

 

[marv hucker]

The FM shares equal responsibility for Ws disappearance, just as much as the police share responsibility for not locating him. Over the past ten years, the FM has never once taken accountability for what occurred that morning. Not once. She has, however, mentioned that she could “kick herself” for failing to jot down the number plates of the suspicious cars she “supposedly” saw, yet she has never expressed any remorse for the decisions she made that morning, decisions that led to disastrous consequences. There’s no valid reason why the FM wouldn’t have been aware of the dangers a 3-year-old could face at Fgm house. She would have been fully aware of the risks involved. The state forest was practically right next door, the front and backyards were unfenced, the side of the house opened directly to an exposed road, and the 5-meter-high balcony had a gate that could be easily opened and accessed ” in fact, it was found open during the walkthrough. Yet, the FM insists that there was no reason not to feel safe at Nana’s house. Common sense would argue otherwise. Had the property been fully fenced, making it difficult for a child to wander off, the chances of W disappearing would have been significantly reduced, and the police could have devoted their time and resources to other leads. Minimise the facts all you like but the facts still remain.The FP had a reasonable duty of care to ensure the safety and well-being of W and his sister, and they failed to uphold that responsibility for both children.
Oh and now we have ff appealing his sentence on intimidation charges on the basis that he was unaware that his behaviour was causing the child to feel fearful. This couple are completely irresponsible. Time and time again I see no accountability by the fp for their actions but the consequences of those actions speak louder than their words. They have no right to care for any children whatsoever under any circumstances

So you’re suggesting every parent who loses track of a toddler for 5 minutes should be criminally liable?

We’ll need quite a few new jails… and obviously a lot more foster carers.

I don’t think there’s any fair way to apportion any blame at this point, with so few facts known.

 

[Chrissy74]

So you’re suggesting every parent who loses track of a toddler for 5 minutes should be criminally liable?

We’ll need quite a few new jails… and obviously a lot more foster carers.

I don’t think there’s any fair way to apportion any blame at this point, with so few facts known.

Childhood injuries frequently occur in and around the home, with children under five being particularly vulnerable due to their limited awareness of danger. Therefore, parents and carers have a responsibility to ensure children are safe both indoors and outdoors. On the morning in question, FM was aware of several risks: suspicious cars in the street, the potential for slipping and grazing her hand on the grassy slope, the lack of a fence around the house, and the path leading from the side of the house to the main road. She also knew that the houses in the area were on large acre blocks and that there was direct access from the house to the state forest. FM was fully aware of the risks involved for W to play in such high-risk areas. Whether it was five minutes, ten minutes, or just two minutes, it only takes a second for something to go terribly wrong. At no point after W ran around the side of the house did the fm say to W “you’re not to play in that area W it’s not safe and i can’t see you” even though she was aware of the dangers.
I know, you know, everyone who has followed Ws case knows that these are the facts.
If a child in your care is injured due to inadequate supervision, a parent or carer could be held liable for failing to provide proper supervision. Therefore, the responsibility for ensuring the childs safety lies with the carers, who have a duty of care to protect children from harm.


I see this as a potential motive to cover up an accident.

Is it right to dismiss the importance of child safety and prevention or should we be encouraging and educating others who might be reading this about the importance of keeping children in their care safe?

There is a wealth of information available online about child safety, and you can even search by age to find more specific and relevant guidance if you’re unsure.

 

[butterstick]

The FM shares equal responsibility for Ws disappearance, just as much as the police share responsibility for not locating him. Over the past ten years, the FM has never once taken accountability for what occurred that morning. Not once. She has, however, mentioned that she could “kick herself” for failing to jot down the number plates of the suspicious cars she “supposedly” saw, yet she has never expressed any remorse for the decisions she made that morning, decisions that led to disastrous consequences.

I'm not someone who pretends the FF are above suspecion, but she has shown considerable grief. Grief trumps remorse usually.

There’s no valid reason why the FM wouldn’t have been aware of the dangers a 3-year-old could face at Fgm house. She would have been fully aware of the risks involved. The state forest was practically right next door, the front and backyards were unfenced, the side of the house opened directly to an exposed road, and the 5-meter-high balcony had a gate that could be easily opened and accessed ” in fact, it was found open during the walkthrough. Yet, the FM insists that there was no reason not to feel safe at Nana’s house. Common sense would argue otherwise. Had the property been fully fenced, making it difficult for a child to wander off, the chances of W disappearing would have been significantly reduced, and the police could have devoted their time and resources to other leads. Minimise the facts all you like but the facts still remain.The FP had a reasonable duty of care to ensure the safety and well-being of W and his sister, and they failed to uphold that responsibility for both children.

I don't know.... it was a quiet street. It's not in suburban Sydney or something. Maybe fencing would be good, and sure leaving him unattended briefly was a mistake, but these things happen everyday thousands of times around Australia and kids survive. You can't always protect against exceptional and freaky circumstances.

I'm not the biggest fan of how the Foster details were handled in the media, but at the same time it's tiresome to push her down the Spedding path of demonisation.

Holding someone liable is pointless unless there's an actual charge. Until then - grief is greater than any minor punishment.

 

[Chrissy74]

I'm not someone who pretends the FF are above suspecion, but she has shown considerable grief. Grief trumps remorse usually.





I don't know.... it was a quiet street. It's not in suburban Sydney or something. Maybe fencing would be good, and sure leaving him unattended briefly was a mistake, but these things happen everyday thousands of times around Australia and kids survive. You can't always protect against exceptional and freaky circumstances.

I'm not the biggest fan of how the Foster details were handled in the media, but at the same time it's tiresome to push her down the Spedding path of demonisation.

Holding someone liable is pointless unless there's an actual charge. Until then - grief is greater than any minor punishment.

I find your statement very interesting
Holding someone liable is pointless unless there's an actual charge.

There could possibly be the potential for future liability charges against the FM. Given her existing convictions for child abuse and intimidation, the DPP might find it more viable to pursue charges of negligence and endangerment rather than disposal of a corpse, especially since no body has been found. I guess the question is Did the fm fail to meet her duty of care to ensure Ws safety?
The first thing that stands out is the suspicious cars she noticed parked in the street that morning. She saw them when she opened the sliding door to step out onto the veranda and again while playing chasey with the children in the front yard. She observed the way the cars were parked and immediately thought they seemed out of place, as it’s unusual for cars to park in front of a house on Benaroon Drive. The area where W went to play had no fence and a path that led directly to where those cars were parked.

 

[bearbear]

The FM shares equal responsibility for Ws disappearance, just as much as the police share responsibility for not locating him. Over the past ten years, the FM has never once taken accountability for what occurred that morning. Not once. She has, however, mentioned that she could “kick herself” for failing to jot down the number plates of the suspicious cars she “supposedly” saw, yet she has never expressed any remorse for the decisions she made that morning, decisions that led to disastrous consequences. There’s no valid reason why the FM wouldn’t have been aware of the dangers a 3-year-old could face at Fgm house. She would have been fully aware of the risks involved. The state forest was practically right next door, the front and backyards were unfenced, the side of the house opened directly to an exposed road, and the 5-meter-high balcony had a gate that could be easily opened and accessed ” in fact, it was found open during the walkthrough. Yet, the FM insists that there was no reason not to feel safe at Nana’s house. Common sense would argue otherwise. Had the property been fully fenced, making it difficult for a child to wander off, the chances of W disappearing would have been significantly reduced, and the police could have devoted their time and resources to other leads. Minimise the facts all you like but the facts still remain.The FP had a reasonable duty of care to ensure the safety and well-being of W and his sister, and they failed to uphold that responsibility for both children.
Oh and now we have ff appealing his sentence on intimidation charges on the basis that he was unaware that his behaviour was causing the child to feel fearful. This couple are completely irresponsible. Time and time again I see no accountability by the fp for their actions but the consequences of those actions speak louder than their words. They have no right to care for any children whatsoever under any circumstances

i cant imagine being able to relax one minute letting my dog outside to play at fgms house let alone a 3 year old child, it would be stressful knowing the possibility to disappear with the forest and no fences and the whole time conversing with fgm and making tea etc

 

[imstilla.grandma]

During an argument that took place during a school drop-off in November 2020, the man screamed and berated the child as they sobbed uncontrollably.

On Monday at Sydney’s Downing Centre District Court, Judge Sean Grant threw out the conviction after finding the spat was a trivial disagreement between a child and a parent who was stressed and frustrated

Missing boy’s foster dad quashes ‘bootstrap’ conviction

The former foster father of missing toddler William Tyrrell has overturned a conviction over the intimidation of another child during a school-run verbal spat.

theqldr.com.au

 

[CooperDyl]

During an argument that took place during a school drop-off in November 2020, the man screamed and berated the child as they sobbed uncontrollably.

On Monday at Sydney’s Downing Centre District Court, Judge Sean Grant threw out the conviction after finding the spat was a trivial disagreement between a child and a parent who was stressed and frustrated

Missing boy’s foster dad quashes ‘bootstrap’ conviction

The former foster father of missing toddler William Tyrrell has overturned a conviction over the intimidation of another child during a school-run verbal spat.

theqldr.com.au

Who talks to their kid like that? Terrible.

 

[drsleuth]

https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/courts-law/william-tyrrells-foster-father-has-big-legal-win/news-story/d7771219c50feba4161223e2f3a8be0c

Judge Grant observed that in the child’s evidence to the court, they were not asked whether they felt intimidated.

“(The child) was not interviewed by police in relation to this conduct and no evidence was adduced by the prosecution over the course of the five-day hearing before the magistrate,” Judge Grant said.

“There was no evidence that (the child) felt intimidated.”

He also noted that on the recording, the child was already crying as they entered the vehicle.

Why would NSWPF not interview the child??
Did they think that the child did not want to talk to them?
Did they not want to hear what she had to say?

 

[SouthAussie]

https://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/courts-law/william-tyrrells-foster-father-has-big-legal-win/news-story/d7771219c50feba4161223e2f3a8be0c

Judge Grant observed that in the child’s evidence to the court, they were not asked whether they felt intimidated.

“(The child) was not interviewed by police in relation to this conduct and no evidence was adduced by the prosecution over the course of the five-day hearing before the magistrate,” Judge Grant said.

“There was no evidence that (the child) felt intimidated.”

He also noted that on the recording, the child was already crying as they entered the vehicle.

Why would NSWPF not interview the child??
Did they think that the child did not want to talk to them?
Did they not want to hear what she had to say?

I am pretty sure that the police interviewed the child. IIRC it was for hours (I remember thinking it was for a long time).

She said that the FD had never hurt her. But that was in relation to the assault charge, and it now sounds as if they didn't interview her in relation to the intimidation charge. Maybe they suspected that she didn't feel intimidated by him, if she felt that she had never been hurt by the FD?


"Interviews with the child in which they said they had never been hurt by the foster father, helped establish his innocence, McIntyre said."
William Tyrrell's foster parents guilty of intimidating another child, cleared of domestic violence allegations

 

[BoysTown]

The way the FF spoke to the child was appalling but I feel like the whole reason for charging them was just to put pressure on them to get a confession. It’s exactly what Gary Jubelin did to BS. IMO

 

[marv hucker]

Childhood injuries frequently occur in and around the home, with children under five being particularly vulnerable due to their limited awareness of danger

Exactly.

With the best efforts & best of intentions, injuries frequently occur. And - by and large - there’s no question of liability.
This is known and understood by all.

 

[marv hucker]

The way the FF spoke to the child was appalling but I feel like the whole reason for charging them was just to put pressure on them to get a confession. It’s exactly what Gary Jubelin did to BS. IMO

Yep.

Not to mention all the other frivolous charges against her/them. Bordering on harassment.

 

[BoysTown]

Who talks to their kid like that? Terrible.

It is terrible.

To me this is a family in deep crisis. They have been thru the unimaginable. If they had nothing to do with Williams disappearance I cannot imagine much worse than being blamed for the death of your child. If the FM actually disposed of the body, I can’t imagine how the FF feels. He must be wonderig if she actually did it? On top of this, Williams sister must almost be a teenager? Or tween. That’s completely different to parenting small kids.

Not a reason to be verbally abusive but I can see where it came from.

 

[drsleuth]

Who talks to their kid like that? Terrible.

Sadly, a hell of a lot of people IMO

I see people screaming / swearing at kids in supermarkets, out at the parks, walking down the street/s frequently / often etc

 

[SouthAussie]

It is terrible.

To me this is a family in deep crisis. They have been thru the unimaginable. If they had nothing to do with Williams disappearance I cannot imagine much worse than being blamed for the death of your child. If the FM actually disposed of the body, I can’t imagine how the FF feels. He must be wonderig if she actually did it? On top of this, Williams sister must almost be a teenager? Or tween. That’s completely different to parenting small kids.

Not a reason to be verbally abusive but I can see where it came from.

I lost all sense of how bad (or good) things were for the child when the police left her there for 9 months after the wooden spoon incident, and didn't even inform FACS of the incident for those 9 months. They are mandatory reporters.

I am left with the impression there were a few incidents where parents were pushed to the breaking point. And that the police were the ones who were pushing them there.