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

[Kurve]

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
COG - Consciousness of guilt. Like WHO KNEW?

 

[31550]

No. It was already difficult as it was to remove her, and she was not adopted, still in care - and the fosters still went to court after she was taken away from them, trying to get her back.

I would have thought they would be grateful not to have to do her washing any more or to cook her dinner…..

Maybe they didn't like losing control over what she could say about their life together?

 

[gymjam]

That’s what gets me the most.

It’s quite the opposite. They hammer home that they are the victims in this. More than the bios, more than William.

Their PR company sucks.

The PR ladies had achieved so many wonderful things with their asbestos campaign and then ....

 

[Awakening]

IMO it was to hear his stated evidence publicly. Many times in cases there are rumours whizzing around a community ... in this case it first appeared that the truck driver Peter and the truck driver FM stated to Det Partridge that she had seen on her Batar Creek Rd drive were 2 separate truck drivers. But it could have been the 2 drivers were actually just one driver. The inquest appearance by Peter was important because it narrowed down specific times and places mentioned by Peter and FM and may now exclude parts of what were once considrted to be stated facts by FM. Important procedures and facts that the Coroner will will no doubt use as part of her reasons for findings.

I think the final tranche will be most interesting given the police applied to recall the FM to reappear before the inquest.

Maybe these two cars were in Benaroon Drive when FM saw them, but Peter’s evidence shoes they weren’t there when William went missing.

 

[Lady O]

I believe the reasons for William and the other child's behaviour was the 'the care style' of both foster carers.

Wouldnt it have been great to put them individually through the same 'care style' that they forced these children of innocence through?

Maybe that's what the Police have in mind - they want to "break" them like they tried to "break" LT.

 

[31550]

The PR ladies had achieved so many wonderful things with their asbestos campaign and then ....

That's one way of looking at it.
You could also view it as cashing in on other people's misfortune on the Government's tab.

 

[gymjam]

'He was here 5 minutes, here 5 minutes ago'
I find it strange the way FM and FF both repeat themselves in their speech, and repeat the same phrase.
It's like they are using earbuds and the sound is lagging. So weird.

It is a sign of difficulty with recall which in itself can be a maker the detail spoken is not truthful.

There were many things said in that call that were not truthful.

The 1st 10 seconds says a lot.

 

[js47]

No but not unexpected for a foster child.
I could tell a few stories more graphic than that. But it's irrelevant, none of this is the fault of the child.

Surely we are not trying to use William's developmental issues as some sort of mitigation or excuse to be used by those responsible for him going missing presumed dead? What's the connection?

Hey a 3YO kid in your care went missing! Yeah, but he was a biter and a bed-wetter!
Oh, ok that's all right then! Move on.

I think this is tied in that William may have been given medication.

 

[js47]

I think there is every possibility William could have been given sedatives.
The FF accepted that it was ok to use them.
How would you like to be a passenger on a flight with him. Can you imagine the fosters sipping their red wine. I guess they had the colouring pencils that you see in a lot of photos.
That is something else that could cause William to be unsettled a strange country?

 

[Poppy Penny]

Was FD included in that?
Maybe her adoption had already been done.

Do children get a say in adoption plans. I shouldn’t imagine.

 

[LRitz]

....Then it came out that it was complicated.
The lady ( who could have been anyone) gave an interview.
At that time I assumed it was a custody issue.

Yes it was confusing at the beginning with no parent interviews. I thought they might have been in witness protection and the mafia/ mob was after them. Doh. I must have been watching too much netflix

 

[LRitz]

The Dawson case has similarities and differences. (I am not entirely familiar with the Dawson case but my observation.)

Forensic disadvantage - the legal precedent to allow circumstantial evidence to be admitted when there is no direct forensic evidence. In both cases, this applies due to the passage of time. Note that the coroner heard from experts who described how remains might deteriorate or be carried off by animals.

Motive - in the case of Dawson there was a clear theory about motive. There is no motive suggested in William's case other than that the FM feared losing custody of FD. Because police theory is that it was an accidental death, not anything more. IMO this is a weak motive. However, were police alleging something more sinister there are more potential motives for disposing of the body.

Tendency, pattern of behaviour. In Dawson's case witnesses testified to seeing violent behaviour between the couple. In William's case FM is not accused of harming him so her tendency evidence ( assault of FD ) is irrelevant. However, were she to be accused of contributing to his death it would be relevant IMO.

For these reasons I believe on the balance of probability, it is more likely that William's death was not accidental, and there is evidence which suggests FM had a strong motive to dispose of his body, and demonstrated tendency to assault children. This then presents an even stronger case that she interfered with a corpse and perverted the course of justice. IMO

Again just the FM? The FF has been to court too.

Also similar - ready explanation from last person to see them alive. She left on a bus to Qld. He ran to the road and was taken.
AS I recall Lynette spoke to her mum the night before . The mum said she sounded drunk which was unlike her. Possible Chris had drugged her, IMO. Did this happen to William as well? Just a thought.

 

[Earls Smother]

Again just the FM? The FF has been to court too.

Also similar - ready explanation from last person to see them alive. She left on a bus to Qld. He ran to the road and was taken.
AS I recall Lynette spoke to her mum the night before . The mum said she sounded drunk which was unlike her. Possible Chris had drugged her, IMO. Did this happen to William as well? Just a thought.

The biggest difference in the 2 cases is the plausibility of the alternative explanations.

The alternative suggestion for Lynette came solely from Chris himself. Only very poor police work allowed his version to be even vaguely accepted for so long. Whilst some people think the alternative options for William are unlikely, they certainly are enough to create doubt. The police spent 7 years on genuinely looking at the other options. If they had 100% ruled out all of the other possible scenarios, then they would be left with a Dawson situation. They haven't, otherwise there would not be such a long list of remaining POI's.

The circumstantial evidence, along with motive, was enough to convict Dawson. It won't be enough here, particularly with much weaker motive.

 

[LRitz]

Maybe these two cars were in Benaroon Drive when FM saw them, but Peter’s evidence shoes they weren’t there when William went missing.

We are pretty sure then that Peter truck driver was on Batar Creek rd around the time that FM could have been there. He was observant and remembered some traffic, but not a Mazda. So puts FM drive, or drive time, or destination into question.

I guess they asked him specifically about dark coloured Mazdas he may have seen anywhere in the area. So, we do not get to hear the question but we hear the answer, about the blond lady in the Mazda with poor parking skills, which seems unimportant. It does show he is observant and he knows what a Mazda looks like. (Though i guess at this point everyone is over the blonde lady in the Mazda in Kew)

Not convinced at all about the 2 cars on Benaroon. FM is the only one who alleges they were there AFAIK. Even FGM says she did not see the cars. No one knew William would be there that morning (except the people in the cattery).

Just out of interest why was Peter truck driver on Radio Ray Hadley, and it was soon after William disappeared? Should that have happened?

 

[gymjam]

Just to be clear, I have no purpose whatsoever to derail this place.

I was told that very first day that a little boy was missing.
I assumed he would be found.
Then it came out that it was complicated.
The lady ( who could have been anyone) gave an interview.
At that time I assumed it was a custody issue.
Then I was told there was a photo going around of William with a black eye so I assumed it was the parents.
Then it came out he was a foster child. Info about the Bios was reported. They had hidden William before.
Publicity about the Bios having run-ins with the Police.
The media painted a bad image of the Bios.

Next was a washing machine guy Police suspected, and they exposed his alleged history of offending of little kids.
Then moved on to Paul Savage.

No wonder I didn't know what to believe.
And I just believed what I was hearing or reading.


When I read that the final inquest was coming up I decided to post on here and ask questions while also looking up stuff myself.
Started to watch videos of the FPs and listening to the 000 call and then reading about the inconsistencies.

But I was also questioning myself if I actually had tunnel vision which led me to look up other what ifs.

But what hasn't left me is the gut feeling that the FPs are involved.
Why? Zero emotion, conflicting stories, and the most stupid excuses they make up.

That's who I am.

Thankyou! It seems most of us have been on a similar journey since 12 September 2014.

I cannot even begin to imagine living the life that William's sibling and now siblings and all biological family members have been forced to endure since that fateful heartwrenching day.

 

[gymjam]

The biggest difference in the 2 cases is the plausibility of the alternative explanations.

The alternative suggestion for Lynette came solely from Chris himself. Only very poor police work allowed his version to be even vaguely accepted for so long. Whilst some people think the alternative options for William are unlikely, they certainly are enough to create doubt. The police spent 7 years on genuinely looking at the other options. If they had 100% ruled out all of the other possible scenarios, then they would be left with a Dawson situation. They haven't, otherwise there would not be such a long list of remaining POI's.

The circumstantial evidence, along with motive, was enough to convict Dawson. It won't be enough here, particularly with much weaker motive.

May I ask what you consider the much weaker motive in William's case is and who this weaker motive is connected to?

 

[31550]

I am not suggesting this could be "the fault of the child". What I am wondering, is could it be a reason for his behaviour. These side effects in small children have only just come to light.

Perhaps the 'reason for his behaviour' had something to do with being ripped away from his mother and father, and carted off to a stranger's home with two older carers who had no experience or empathy, and saw him as someone who needed to be 'fixed'?

Prevention is better than 'cure'. Perhaps try to support the bio family first, so this 'behaviour' doesn't emerge?

All this focus on William's 'behaviour'. Not something that is an issue inherent in William, but something brought about by the way he was treated by others IMO. Little kids have no innate 'right and wrong' or good and bad' - it's all what they are taught and shown by adults around them.

How about focussing on the 'behaviour' of other people. Adults. Who are in a position to actually do something positive for William, rather than 'disappear' him and then try and explain it away by, "Oh, that's what we expect from these sort of kids!".

The whole thing is arse about IMO.

 

[Wallace52]

The PR ladies had achieved so many wonderful things with their asbestos campaign and then ....

Maybe they should have stuck with toxic substances and stayed away from toxic people? Just a thought.

 

[Wallace52]

May I ask what you consider the much weaker motive in William's case is and who this weaker motive is connected to?

The weaker motive means that the proposed motive from police that the FM didn’t call emergency services for medical assistance and she moved William’s body off the property after a balcony accident and left him, deceased in the bush was that she didn’t want to lose custody of his sister.

Can you see how the proposed actions and the proposed motive don’t quite line up?

Many people are questioning this proposed motive because it doesn’t really make sense. IMO

 

[gymjam]

We are pretty sure then that Peter truck driver was on Batar Creek rd around the time that FM could have been there. He was observant and remembered some traffic, but not a Mazda. So puts FM drive, or drive time, or destination into question.

I guess they asked him specifically about dark coloured Mazdas he may have seen anywhere in the area. So, we do not get to hear the question but we hear the answer, about the blond lady in the Mazda with poor parking skills, which seems unimportant. It does show he is observant and he knows what a Mazda looks like. (Though i guess at this point everyone is over the blonde lady in the Mazda in Kew)

Not convinced at all about the 2 cars on Benaroon. FM is the only one who alleges they were there AFAIK. Even FGM says she did not see the cars. No one knew William would be there that morning (except the people in the cattery).

Just out of interest why was Peter truck driver on Radio Ray Hadley, and it was soon after William disappeared? Should that have happened?

Ray Hadley had a live interview with Fehon the then head of the Port Macquarie local police command area which covered a significant area and included Kendall and current investigation and search for William.

Fehon had given updates and pleaded for anyone with any information to make contact and then went off air.

I understand Peter the truck driver phoned in very shortly after Fehon finished and Peter started speaking to Hadley detailing what he had observed in Kew and Kendall on 12th. Hadley realised the importance of Peter's detailed descriptions and took him off air before he had given out all hus observed details and behind the scene he was connected thru to the police investigation team.

Blonde lady was in Camry.

I too have great difficulty believing the ever changing narrative of FM.

 

[31550]

Just noodling some figures.
In 2014 there were 5.8 million vehicles registered in NSW.
In 2014 Camry's accounted for 2.5% of all cars registered.
So about 145,000 Camrys in NSW in 2014.
Now only about 1-2% of Camrys are black.
So let's say 2000 (maximum 3,000) black Camrys in NSW in 2014.
Northern NSW makes up about 10% of the total population of NSW.
Assuming an even distribution of black Camrys across the state, this gives us about 300 max black Camrys in Northern NSW in 2014.
Starting with postcodes closest to Kendall, and maybe focussing on those registered to females, it should only take a matter of weeks to investigate these and narrow the list down to a handful of vehicles which MIGHT have been in Kendall on that day.
Of course it might have been an unregistered or repainted vehicle, or this search might have been fruitless, but I wonder if it was ever attempted.

 

[Lady O]

Perhaps the 'reason for his behaviour' had something to do with being ripped away from his mother and father, and carted off to a stranger's home with two older carers who had no experience or empathy, and saw him as someone who needed to be 'fixed'?

Prevention is better than 'cure'. Perhaps try to support the bio family first, so this 'behaviour' doesn't emerge?

All this focus on William's 'behaviour'. Not something that is an issue inherent in William, but something brought about by the way he was treated by others IMO. Little kids have no innate 'right and wrong' or good and bad' - it's all what they are taught and shown by adults around them.

How about focussing on the 'behaviour' of other people. Adults. Who are in a position to actually do something positive for William, rather than 'disappear' him and then try and explain it away by, "Oh, that's what we expect from these sort of kids!".

The whole thing is arse about IMO.

I don't disagree that his behaviour could have been due to environment. That doesn't mean the environment he was born into was 'better' than the one he ended up in. The parents were not providing an appropriate home and had no intention of changing and I'm not sure they would have taken on board anything FACS suggested to improve. The children were in a very poor situation.

The older couple had apparently fostered quite a few children without negative impact (as far as we are aware), had stable jobs, good incomes and were keen to have children "of their own". It probably seemed an ideal placement.

There was no doubt the foster parents were having difficulty, but outwardly, they pretended everything was rosy. Whether WT's behaviour was worse than other 3yo's is not something we can judge, except FM said to Ben that she was struggling.

Whether FM "disapeared him" is yet to be proven, but it is an allegation by the Police, with apparently no evidence to support it. Similarly, there is no evidence to support abduction. Neither is there any reason to believe he wandered off into the bush and was never seen again.

In light of what happened with his sister after he went missing, it appears that his foster parents were most likely not appropriate people to take care of children. As you say, you can't blame the child for it's behaviour in this situation, but we can suspect (although we do not know) if WT was similarly mistreated by them, and whether this was the reason he 'went missing'.

 

[Earls Smother]

May I ask what you consider the much weaker motive in William's case is and who this weaker motive is connected to?

The police theory is William accidentally died and FM hid the body. She doesn't want to risk losing the daughter.

You've been following the case long enough to answer your own question.

 

[LRitz]

Ray Hadley had a live interview with Fehon the then head of the Port Macquarie local police command area which covered a significant area and included Kendall and current investigation and search for William.

Fehon had given updates and pleaded for anyone with any information to make contact and then went off air.

I understand Peter the truck driver phoned in very shortly after Fehon finished and Peter started speaking to Hadley detailing what he had observed in Kew and Kendall on 12th. Hadley realised the importance of Peter's detailed descriptions and took him off air before he had given out all hus observed details and behind the scene he was connected thru to the police investigation team.

Blonde lady was in Camry.

I too have great difficulty believing the ever changing narrative of FM.

Camry? Mazda? Golf? Lucky they did not have to interview me

 

[gymjam]

The weaker motive means that the proposed motive from police that the FM didn’t call emergency services for medical assistance and she moved William’s body off the property after a balcony accident and left him, deceased in the bush was that she didn’t want to lose custody of his sister.

Can you see how the proposed actions and the proposed motive don’t quite line up?

Many people are questioning this proposed motive because it doesn’t really make sense. IMO

Thankyou for your detail re the proposed motive.

Yep I wholehearedly agree with the current proposed actions vs proposed motive makes no sense whatsoever.

Firstly, what exact proposed action or actions does one actually consider, when to choose a specific action you would need to filter out the contents of changing and mixed known narrative and statements and the unknown and it would be like collecting all contents from the centre of a tornado and placing the pieces of interest in some sort of order but first attempting to know what pieces they may be and if any piece was missing!

What would then take place if vital information had not been initially held by the vortex within the tornado ... thrown out and discarded perhaps destroyed for eternity?

Given Earl Smother's detail included in his post I am very interested in what their personal particular perspective on motive connected to William's case is, because Earl didnt include that and I am very interested in everyone ones opinion and input.

What could investigation procedures and process policy restrictions have missed? Is there something that is so far out of 'normal' accepted investigative processes and considerations that they had 'it' and it was there and present and used continuously and always had been whirling away in the background?

It seems to me there is very little consideration or focus on decisions made on days either side of 12th and not always directly on either side but extended out and beyond, and the times of those decisions by both participants and who did something and what is it they did and who did they choose to be perhaps be involuntarily involved or be connected to that choice? Did someone state that something had occured but chose not to provide that detail until the investigation had changed focus? Did investigations take notice?

BE careful what you wish for, for is it really what you wish for or was your wish really the wish of another person and something you dreaded ?

 

[gymjam]

The police theory is William accidentally died and FM hid the body. She doesn't want to risk losing the daughter.

You've been following the case long enough to answer your own question.

Earl you just wrote about a theory. What is the proposed motive please? Was it she feared that the other child would be removed? That motive then tells me there is something else missing.

If she had left William insitu the would have been a clearer pathway for detectives and the Coroner to ultimately consider accidental death supported by evidence obtained.

Removing the body brings focus to the person that changes the narrative continuously.

Did anyone else change their narrative continuously? Add things, takeaway things, change things, withhold things, demand things, take control of issued statements?

IMO