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

  • #1,461
Does anyone know the brand of the camera? It seems strange to me that a manufacturer would set the timestamp in the camera as it could be distributed anywhere in the world, and they would also have to turn them on and add a battery wouldn't they? Also if the camera was manufactured outside of the Bali timezone, it seems very important to find this information out. Also, do features like timestamps rely on batteries? Why would a retailer set the timestamp unless it was a selling feature to demonstrate to the customer. Wouldn't they show you how to change the time, if it was a selling feature? I'm now understanding Couldbe's previous post and I'm interested too.
Does anyone know or have a link?
....... whether the camera containing the proof of life photos was purchased by the FM on their trip to Bali in late July to early August 2014?
 
  • #1,462
The ex foster grandmother in her walkthrough stated that they ate breakfast at the table about 8am. This seems not to match up with drawing on the patio with photo at 7.39am, bike riding, cups of tea etc all before William disappeared. It's the time line and sequence of events I am confused about. Breakfast to disappearance??

William Tyrrell person of interest makes astonishing claim about the boy's foster grandmother | Daily Mail Online Astonishing claim about William Tyrrell's foster grandmother
 
  • #1,463
Does anyone know the brand of the camera? It seems strange to me that a manufacturer would set the timestamp in the camera as it could be distributed anywhere in the world, and they would also have to turn them on and add a battery wouldn't they? Also if the camera was manufactured outside of the Bali timezone, it seems very important to find this information out. Also, do features like timestamps rely on batteries? Why would a retailer set the timestamp unless it was a selling feature to demonstrate to the customer. Wouldn't they show you how to change the time, if it was a selling feature? I'm now understanding Couldbe's previous post and I'm interested too.
hi iiiis

There are so many variables when it comes to timestamps and timezones—it gets messy fast. The camera should’ve been the first thing examined, to establish a clear reference point for analysing the timestamps. For example, if the camera’s timezone setting had been checked and noted—say it was manually set to Bali time (UTC+8)—then any photos taken in Sydney (UTC+10) would clearly show timestamps that were 2 hours behind local time.
In that case, there’d be no need for forensics to “fix” or adjust the timestamps—the discrepancy would make sense, and the camera settings would explain it.
When the timestamp issue was raised during the inquest and the coroner requested a proper investigation, it was reported that NSW Police took another look and found a photo taken a week earlier showing a real-time clock. That clock showed a difference of 118 minutes compared to the times on the photos. So the question is: was the Sunrise photo and its timestamp discrepancy picked up in the original examination, or only after the coroner got involved? From memory forensic xways examined the data using the cameras sd card. Who knows if FP handed over both the camera and the sd card or the sd card only.
Another thing- if police did use the Sunrise photo time as being the real time, did the camera’s Timezone setting corroborate this? Because if the camera was for example set to UTC+10 originally then all photo timestamps including the ones from Bali will be ahead of real time by 2hrs.

If police never checked or recorded the camera’s internal clock or timezone settings which seems to be the case, then you end up with a mess—and any timestamp analysis becomes guesswork.
 
Last edited:
  • #1,464
By DANIEL PIOTROWSKI
Published: 10:05 AEST, 31 May 2019 | Updated: 16:00 AEST, 31 May 2019
William Tyrrell's father lashes foster carers in police statement
“The biological father said in the statement that he had been told William was believed to have learning and development difficulties.”

JMO - In view of what the biological father has said in his statement about William's learning and development difficulties, that may have been the cause of the behaviour of William that the FGM was describing in her Walkthrough:

""
She said William drew pictures with crayons, 'got fed up', and while he was doing so was photographed by his foster mother, 'that photo of him in the Spider-Man suit, that was taken here'.
'Then (the foster mother) had him throwing the dice, and he was THROWING the dice and she had to teach him that you don’t, just let it roll out of your hand."
 
  • #1,465

<modsnip: Quoted / referenced post was removed>


CO's interview with Hans Rupp .......

A forensic search of FGM's house was done three days after William disappeared.
There had been forensic testing of William's foster nana's car, and of the new four wheel drive.
Foster parents had surrendered computers and phones for forensic testing.
William's foster parents told the police the timer on the camera was off by two hours. This has been verified by digital experts.

Source: Missing William Tyrrell by Caroline Overington, chapter 5.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,466
<modsnip: Quoted / referenced post was removed>


CO's interview with Hans Rupp .......

A forensic search of FGM's house was done three days after William disappeared.
There had been forensic testing of William's foster nana's car, and of the new four wheel drive.
Foster parents had surrendered computers and phones for forensic testing.
William's foster parents told the police the timer on the camera was off by two hours. This has been verified by digital experts.

Source: Missing William Tyrrell by Caroline Overington, chapter 5.
118 minutes is 2 hours, minus 2 minutes. It seems pretty consistent with '2 hours off'
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,467
<modsnip: Quoted / referenced post was removed>


CO's interview with Hans Rupp .......

A forensic search of FGM's house was done three days after William disappeared.
There had been forensic testing of William's foster nana's car, and of the new four wheel drive.
Foster parents had surrendered computers and phones for forensic testing.
William's foster parents told the police the timer on the camera was off by two hours. This has been verified by digital experts.


Source: Missing William Tyrrell by Caroline Overington, chapter 5.
From your post here SA (BBM):
"Foster parents had surrendered computers and phones for forensic testing.: and
"William's foster parents told the police the timer on the camera was off by two hours.",
__________________________________________________________
JMO -
In reference to the foster parents then, 3 days after William disappeaews, focussing on telling police about the timer on the camera,

... why did the foster parents feel the need to point that out?

... It appears that only computers and phones were surrendered!

... at that point the focus would have been on the FM was saying when she last saw William (Which she said was while drinking her tea on the back patio with the FGM) at approx 10.30 am
... and it was then she realised he had gone missing.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,468
Does anyone know the brand of the camera? It seems strange to me that a manufacturer would set the timestamp in the camera as it could be distributed anywhere in the world, and they would also have to turn them on and add a battery wouldn't they? Also if the camera was manufactured outside of the Bali timezone, it seems very important to find this information out. Also, do features like timestamps rely on batteries? Why would a retailer set the timestamp unless it was a selling feature to demonstrate to the customer. Wouldn't they show you how to change the time, if it was a selling feature? I'm now understanding Couldbe's previous post and I'm interested too.
I have read, that the manufacturer sets the time stamp, and when the buyer (where ever) has bought his new camera, he has to put in the memory card and a/the battery, then has to set the time, according to his geo location. So I did understand it. MOO
 
Last edited:
  • #1,469
The FM behaviour immediately after William disappeared is interesting. This article indicates she wanted to minimise the public interest in his case?

 
  • #1,470
I have read, that the manufacturer sets the time stamp, and when the buyer (where ever) has bought his new camera, he has to put in the memory card and a/the battery, then has to set the time, according to his geo location. So I did understand it. MOO
That's so interesting, so it would be v. important to find out where the camera was manufactured and what the time difference in that zone is compared to Sydney. I'm sure there would be some type of number on the camera to show where it was produced. MOO
 
  • #1,471
The FM behaviour immediately after William disappeared is interesting. This article indicates she wanted to minimise the public interest in his case?

Some of the main lines of the article that stand out to me, bbm

William Tyrrell's foster mother fought to keep secret the truth about the missing toddler, arguing that revealing he was a foster child would intensify publicity and force her family into hiding. To my mind, if FACS had allowed WT's status to have been revealed at the time of the disappearance, when both children were in daycare, no other details would have been released and all the drawn out long explanations. It seems mainly to have served FACS. MOO

The PR campaign, which raised more than $1 million in public donations, had as its main objectives 'to manage public consciousness surrounding the disappearance' and 'empower William's Parents as the foremost voice for William'.

This referred to the foster mother and foster father rather than William's parents, at a time when the toddler's out-of-home care when he disappeared was one of the legal community's worst kept secrets.
I think this speaks for itself.

She said it was the 'mainstream media' which had called them William's 'parents' and they had 'followed police advice' about how to handle publicity. I find this statement a bit disingenuous as the MSM took their cue from FACS and the foster couple seemed to be on board with not only FACS and the police but also how they were represented in the PR campaign as WT's parents. They were the "voice" of that campaign. Considering they were the agents of FACS, they didn't have to do that but seemed to take on the responsibility of being the voice for William while also trying to conceal the fact that they were agents for FACS, and it seems FACS supported this action. MOO

In a stunning victory for Ms Smith 2016, Justice Paul Brereton ruled William could be revealed as a foster child, but his judgment could not be revealed as FACS immediately appealed.

The department lost again in August 2017, when the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal upheld Justice Brereton's decision and only then did the truth finally come out.

His Honour said it was inexplicable why William's carers (the foster parents) had been represented as William's parents.
To my mind, all of this was important because during the process of this case, it emerged that other agendas were going on behind the scenes and taking priority over the fact that a child had gone missing in out of home care who was under the guardianship of a govt. department. It was more important to protect the government department and its agents than a missing child and those tactics may have impeded the investigation, as the agents were the last people to have seen WT alive.

'I am responsible for determining the appropriate media strategy (which) takes into account the views of ... the Department of Family and Community Services (FACS),' Mr Jubelin said in a court affidavit also obtained by Daily Mail Australia.
He said information should be revealed 'in a managed way' and revealing that the missing toddler had been removed from his biological parents and placed with the foster couple 'would be damaging to the investigation'.
Mr Jubelin stated publicly after Ms Smith's court win, that the foster revelation had not damaged his investigation.
??!!

The publicity campaign he launched with FACs and the foster parents, using PR firm Insight Communications, had helped double Strike Force Rosann's funds from state coffers and establish a $1 million reward by the State Government.
So this clears up one question I have had for a while, which is, who actually is behind the hiring of the PR firm. Although we have heard over the years in interviews that they are working on this case pro bono and that friends of the FP's, referred them to this company, it did not answer some glaring questions for me such as, How was it that foster parents, one of which was present at the time of the disappearance was given permission by the Department of Family and Community Services to run this campaign and represent themselves as his parents. It would have had to have all been okayed by the department. Also there is glaring dishonesty going on from this department by way of omission by allowing these agents to be interviewed and not acknowledge FACS hand in the campaign. The FP's don't acknowledge it, the PR company doesn't acknowledge it, the police don't acknowledge it, the media barely acknowledge it. And yet at that stage of the investigation, FACS were hiding behind the FP's and the FP's were protected by FACS.

So it seems the campaign was also used to secure more funding from the state to have available for the type of investigation that GJ wanted to run and in other parts of the article it refers to GJ thinking that the public disclosure of WT's status would reduce the public's interest in contributing to that money. MOO
 
Last edited:
  • #1,472
Some of the main lines of the article that stand out to me, bbm

William Tyrrell's foster mother fought to keep secret the truth about the missing toddler, arguing that revealing he was a foster child would intensify publicity and force her family into hiding. To my mind, if FACS had allowed WT's status to have been revealed at the time of the disappearance, when both children were in daycare, no other details would have been released and all the drawn out long explanations. It seems mainly to have served FACS. MOO

The PR campaign, which raised more than $1 million in public donations, had as its main objectives 'to manage public consciousness surrounding the disappearance' and 'empower William's Parents as the foremost voice for William'.

This referred to the foster mother and foster father rather than William's parents, at a time when the toddler's out-of-home care when he disappeared was one of the legal community's worst kept secrets.
I think this speaks for itself.

She said it was the 'mainstream media' which had called them William's 'parents' and they had 'followed police advice' about how to handle publicity. I find this statement a bit disingenuous as the MSM took their cue from FACS and the foster couple seemed to be on board with not only FACS and the police but also how they were represented in the PR campaign as WT's parents. They were the "voice" of that campaign. Considering they were the agents of FACS, they didn't have to do that but seemed to take on the responsibility of being the voice for William while also trying to conceal the fact that they were agents for FACS, and it seems FACS supported this action. MOO

In a stunning victory for Ms Smith 2016, Justice Paul Brereton ruled William could be revealed as a foster child, but his judgment could not be revealed as FACS immediately appealed.

The department lost again in August 2017, when the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal upheld Justice Brereton's decision and only then did the truth finally come out.

His Honour said it was inexplicable why William's carers (the foster parents) had been represented as William's parents.
To my mind, all of this was important because during the process of this case, it emerged that other agendas were going on behind the scenes and taking priority over the fact that a child had gone missing in out of home care who was under the guardianship of a govt. department. It was more important to protect the government department and its agents than a missing child and those tactics may have impeded the investigation, as the agents were the last people to have seen WT alive.

'I am responsible for determining the appropriate media strategy (which) takes into account the views of ... the Department of Family and Community Services (FACS),' Mr Jubelin said in a court affidavit also obtained by Daily Mail Australia.
He said information should be revealed 'in a managed way' and revealing that the missing toddler had been removed from his biological parents and placed with the foster couple 'would be damaging to the investigation'.
Mr Jubelin stated publicly after Ms Smith's court win, that the foster revelation had not damaged his investigation.
??!!

The publicity campaign he launched with FACs and the foster parents, using PR firm Insight Communications, had helped double Strike Force Rosann's funds from state coffers and establish a $1 million reward by the State Government.
So this clears up one question I have had for a while, which is, who actually is behind the hiring of the PR firm. Although we have heard over the years in interviews that they are working on this case pro bono and that friends of the FP's, referred them to this company, it did not answer some glaring questions for me such as, How was it that foster parents, one of which was present at the time of the disappearance was given permission by the Department of Family and Community Services to run this campaign and represent themselves as his parents. It would have had to have all been okayed by the department. Also there is glaring dishonesty going on from this department by way of omission by allowing these agents to be interviewed and not acknowledge FACS hand in the campaign. The FP's don't acknowledge it, the PR company doesn't acknowledge it, the police don't acknowledge it, the media barely acknowledge it. And yet at that stage of the investigation, FACS were hiding behind the FP's and the FP's were protected by FACS.

So it seems the campaign was also used to secure more funding from the state to have available for the type of investigation that GJ wanted to run and in other parts of the article it refers to GJ thinking that the public disclosure of WT's status would reduce the public's interest in contributing to that money. MOO
How did the campaign secure funding for Jubelins investigation?
 
  • #1,473
How did the campaign secure funding for Jubelins investigation?
The publicity campaign he launched with FACs and the foster parents, using PR firm Insight Communications, had helped double Strike Force Rosann's funds from state coffers and establish a $1 million reward by the State Government. William Tyrrell foster mother files: her war to keep truth secret

Not sure, possibly through the sale of merchandise or maybe the sale of merchandise through the campaign was evidence enough for the state govt. at the time to set aside money from the budget to the police specifically for the investigation. possibly showing there is public interest in this case specifically, which is of political benefit as well. MOO
 
  • #1,474
The publicity campaign he launched with FACs and the foster parents, using PR firm Insight Communications, had helped double Strike Force Rosann's funds from state coffers and establish a $1 million reward by the State Government. William Tyrrell foster mother files: her war to keep truth secret

Not sure, possibly through the sale of merchandise or maybe the sale of merchandise through the campaign was evidence enough for the state govt. at the time to set aside money from the budget to the police specifically for the investigation. possibly showing there is public interest in this case specifically, which is of political benefit as well. MOO
That’s not answering the question though. How did the website directly secure funds for the investigation? The website brought more attention to the case but it was the foster parents that pushed for the reward. <modsnip> It’s a reward for information the same as many other cases, it is currently still unclaimed so no money has gone anywhere. Any funds raised by the campaign went straight back into the running of the campaign. <mod snipped - bickering>
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,475
That’s not answering the question though. How did the website directly secure funds for the investigation? The website brought more attention to the case but it was the foster parents that pushed for the reward. That million dollars did also not go to Jubelins investigation as you said. It’s a reward for information the same as many other cases, it is currently still unclaimed so no money has gone anywhere. Any funds raised by the campaign went straight back into the running of the campaign. <mod snipped - bickering>
The quote is from the article I linked, I didn't make it up, perhaps contacting the journalist would answer the question.

The quote from the article is saying that the publicity campaign he launched in conjunction with FACS and the FP's, helped to secure double the strikeforce funds from state coffers in addition to establishing a $1 million reward by the State govt. So all moneys would have come from the taxpayer I assume. I think I gave a pretty good guess. Either it came from the campaign or the interest of the public in the campaign was used as evidence to the state govt. to cough up more for the investigation and also the $1 million dollar reward.<mod snip - bickering>
The foster parents pushed for the reward increase reportedly however it is not a stretch to think that the effectiveness of securing the increase in that reward came more from their silent, unacknowledged partner, FACS, due to their intimate access to the NSW govt. at the time. MOO
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #1,476
The FM behaviour immediately after William disappeared is interesting. This article indicates she wanted to minimise the public interest in his case?


I had forgotten about that 2022 article. This bit is interesting given all of the noise around the decision:

Mr Jubelin stated publicly after Ms Smith's court win, that the foster revelation had not damaged his investigation.
 
  • #1,477
I had forgotten about that 2022 article. This bit is interesting given all of the noise around the decision:

Mr Jubelin stated publicly after Ms Smith's court win, that the foster revelation had not damaged his investigation.
Yes, after claiming in a court affidavit to Justice Brereton that the revelation "...would be damaging to the investigation."
 
  • #1,478
The publicity campaign he launched with FACs and the foster parents, using PR firm Insight Communications, had helped double Strike Force Rosann's funds from state coffers and establish a $1 million reward by the State Government. William Tyrrell foster mother files: her war to keep truth secret

It is an article that quotes Allanna Pearl Smith all the way through. How would Allanna Pearl Smith or Candace Sutton know if the publicity campaign doubled SFR's funds? They wouldn't. That would be a police budgetary matter.

Jubes has quoted in his books how hard he fought to keep as many detectives as he could on William's case. I believe there were 26 detectives at one point in time.
It caused problems between Jubes and Scott Cook. Cook wanted William's case to go to Unsolved Homicides so he could get the detectives back onto other cases.

imo
 
  • #1,479
Some of the main lines of the article that stand out to me, bbm

William Tyrrell's foster mother fought to keep secret the truth about the missing toddler, arguing that revealing he was a foster child would intensify publicity and force her family into hiding. To my mind, if FACS had allowed WT's status to have been revealed at the time of the disappearance, when both children were in daycare, no other details would have been released and all the drawn out long explanations. It seems mainly to have served FACS. MOO

The PR campaign, which raised more than $1 million in public donations, had as its main objectives 'to manage public consciousness surrounding the disappearance' and 'empower William's Parents as the foremost voice for William'.
RSBM

I believe the campaign raising more than $1 million in donations to be wildly inaccurate.

I remember seeing the figure years ago as it was publicly available information and the amount raised was nothing close to $1M. Unfortunately I can't remember where the info came from so I'll have to go with IMO.

This article written by Caroline Overington in August 2019 states a figure that is more realistic and closer to what I remember seeing.

"William Tyrrell’s foster parents were encouraged to engage a public relations firm to lobby for more police resources, including more money, as they fought to stop the case from going “cold”.
That firm, Insight Communications, has worked pro bono for more than four years to keep William’s name in the news.

Costs to Insight’s business have been offset by donations through the Where’s William? website, and by selling William-themed merchandise.

More than $182,000 has been raised and spent, mainly distributing Where’s William? stickers and posters; media monitoring; and keeping the Facebook page active."

 
  • #1,480
It is an article that quotes Allanna Pearl Smith all the way through. How would Allanna Pearl Smith or Candace Sutton know if the publicity campaign doubled SFR's funds? They wouldn't. That would be a police budgetary matter.

Jubes has quoted in his books how hard he fought to keep as many detectives as he could on William's case. I believe there were 26 detectives at one point in time.
It caused problems between Jubes and Scott Cook. Cook wanted William's case to go to Unsolved Homicides so he could get the detectives back onto other cases.

imo


The article quotes a lot of people all the way through and I fail to see the connection to APS and the information Candace Sutton put in her article.

The following quote is by one of the PR company in an interview. This article was published at least 2 years after the Daily mail, Candace Sutton article. I doubt APS and CS know the PR company's business better than they do themselves. MOO



She points to how the foster parents twice lobbied for police investigative resources to be doubled so that William’s case didn’t get relegated to an unsolved crime and how they fought to have the reward increased from the original $250,000 offering.

“What many won’t know is how hard this heartbroken couple fought behind the scenes,” she says. “Someone with anything to hide would hardly work so hard to increase investigative resources.”
 
Last edited:

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
159
Guests online
2,688
Total visitors
2,847

Forum statistics

Threads
633,259
Messages
18,638,683
Members
243,459
Latest member
GlenNi
Back
Top