Current Disappearance of 3yo William Tyrrell Pt 2 * Coroners Inquiry CANCELLED!

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
Continued from PART 1

Criminal charges:
  • Apprehended Violence Orders on both (AVOs)
  • Lying to the NSW Crime Commission on former foster mother *Not Guilty
  • Lying to the NSW Crime Commission on former foster father *Not Guilty
  • 2 x charges of assault against a child on former foster mother *Guilty
  • 1 x charge of assault against a child on former foster father *Not Guilty
  • Stalking &/or Intimidation on both *Guilty
  • Dummy bidding real estate fraud *Guilty
TIMELINE

Where's William Tyrrell? - The Ch 10 podcast (under Coroner's subpoena)

Operation Arkstone

Please type names out in full for those who are not covered by suppression orders.

For those covered by suppression orders, please use the following to indicate:

FM - Foster Mother
FF - Foster Father
FGM - Foster Grandmother
FD - Foster Daughter
FPs - Foster Parents

Up to you if you wish to refer to them as former fosters but please write it in full, strictly using the above. No deviations.

Other initials posters will use informally but should not are:


BCR - Batar Creek Road
FA - Frank Abbott
MW - Michelle White
SFR - Strike Force Rosann
AMS - Anne Maree Sharpley
CCR - Cobb and Co Road
GO - Geoff Owens
One even reduced bike riding to - BR :rolleyes:
COG - Consciousness of guilt. Like WHO KNEW?
 
Last edited:
Dr Mallett said it was time for NSW Police to "charge her or leave her alone".

"People have the right to the presumption of innocence and that has been denied in this case via gossip and innuendo for years," she said.

"If there is evidence she was involved, then she should be charged, or police should acknowledge there is insufficient evidence to charge her.

"If police don't have enough evidence to charge at this stage, she should be able to live in peace now."

 

Log in to remove this ad.

If there was only one car heard around the time William disappeared, it had to her in the FGMs car because we know she went out in it.

It's only the time that seems to be in dispute.
Note the Crabbes did not report hearing Mrs Savage drive out at 10.38. So they can only hear cars coming and going from FGM house. And only heard one - around 10am not 10:30 when FF got home. This can only have been FM in FGM car.
 
Apparently that's what the Strike Force thinks too. But I think it's too tight a timeframe: talking to AMS for a minute or two, running back up the hill to the house, getting the car keys (unless she already had them and had already hidden William's body in the car), driving, hiding William, driving, parking, appearing around the back of the house in time to yell across the No.51 backyard to ask FF whether to call the police, then dialing at 10:56.
I think she’s done two drives.

I’m happy to be corrected.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

I think she’s done two drives.

I’m happy to be corrected.
Two drives would be an admission of guilt.
But even one drive - I ask again, WHY take FGM car to look for William? Why not take FF car? Better view, William would recognise it and come to it, can go on 4WD tracks, ...
Answer = she wasn't looking for William.
 
Note the Crabbes did not report hearing Mrs Savage drive out at 10.38. So they can only hear cars coming and going from FGM house. And only heard one - around 10am not 10:30 when FF got home. This can only have been FM in FGM car.
From the previous inquest:

"Peter Crabb, who is appearing via video link.

Mr Crabb tells the court he cannot recall seeing any cars parked on the street when he returned to his house across from the foster Grandmother’s house about 9.30am.

Mr Crabb was asked if he heard a car doing a turn on Benaroon Drive shortly after he got home. He said he did hear a car, but didn’t take much notice because it “sounded exactly like the postman”
.
 
The main issue with the police theory is the blind assumption that William died accidentally in the first place. No evidence of this. However, it's entirely possible, and more likely in the circumstances that he was killed or at least did not die by accident. Human intervention. Otherwise why cover up?
Well, maybe there is no blood? Or anything to suggest murder?

Now, a defensive injury might be leaning on the side of murder, but no one had defensive injuries that day - did they?

I read it again only recently. Did someone here post a transcript or a snip of ?
The transcript is under lock and key. Not many people have it. AFAIK.

Maybe a snip of it made it in here.
 
Last edited:
Two drives would be an admission of guilt.
But even one drive - I ask again, WHY take FGM car to look for William? Why not take FF car? Better view, William would recognise it and come to it, can go on 4WD tracks, ...
Answer = she wasn't looking for William.
Where was the foster father when FM took the FGM car for a drive close to 10:40 or thereabouts?
 
Dan Box thinks it's a ridiculous theory. I share his views.
How do you know what Dan Box thinks?

He’s not there to give his opinion. He is there as a host to be an objective journalist and questions everything, isn’t he?

I don’t really think he has an opinion one way or another. I mean, he is an award winning journalist. He knows he’s not to be biased and he knows the goal is to remain impartial and just report the facts.
 
Where was the foster father when FM took the FGM car for a drive close to 10:40 or thereabouts?
I can't see how the drive could be at 10.40.
But at 10.40 AMS was talking to FM and reported hearing a male voice in FGM yard calling for William. So I think this was FF who testified to looking for William in the yard and surrounding areas until FM called 000.
 

Police have still gathered no forensic evidence explaining how William Tyrrell went missing 10 years ago, the long-running inquest into the toddler’s disappearance was told as it resumed.

Gerard Craddock SC, the Counsel Assisting the Coroner, said a statement from the lead investigator on the case Detective Chief Inspector David Laidlaw had been heavily redacted as it was “in the form of one person’s opinions about what evidence shows”.
In other words, is likely only circumstantial and speculative evidence, and 1 or 2 preferred/most likely according to Laidlaw theories, out of the many possibilities.
 
Box is pushing an agenda. They the media want the story and the only way they get that story is if they push her cause.....so they have. Don't believe a word coming from him.
That's one of the best theories I've heard or read so far related to this whole case.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top