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

[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

Suppression orders are in force, 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
One even reduced bike riding to - BR

 

[31550]

No, but they could have given her a break. Or maybe 3 or 4 breaks.

It’s a bit much.

It’s not fair to sacrifice one kid to find another. Is it?

IMHO

How do you know they didn't give her breaks?

 

[Wallace52]

How do you know they didn't give her breaks?

According to news reports, NSWPOL homicide detectives took her out of school and asked her 750 questions then brought her back to school. School goes for like 5.5 - 6.5 hours.

It’s a bit of a mathematical equation.

There are reportedly 750 questions asked over 5.5 - 6.5 hours, but with travel time Detectives may have only had her for 3 hours as she would have been returned to the primary school before home time.

You can bet your bottom dollar she didn’t have 3 or 4 breaks.

Here is a bit of info from the school she was attending when she was interviewed by police. Obviously she doesn’t attend that school anymore as it is only a K-6 school, and this incident happened when she was 10-11, so clearly she’s no longer in a K-6 school.

“ ******** School provides a safe and supportive environment for students during supervised school hours, which are between 8:45am - 3:15pm”


JMO

 

[31550]

According to news reports, NSWPOL homicide detectives took her out of school and asked her 750 questions then brought her back to school. School goes for like 5.5 - 6.5 hours.

It’s a bit of a mathematical equation.

There are reportedly 750 questions asked over 5.5 - 6.5 hours, but with travel time Detectives may have only had her for 3 hours as she would have been returned to the primary school before home time.

You can bet your bottom dollar she didn’t have 3 or 4 breaks.

Here is a bit of info from the school she was attending when she was interviewed by police. Obviously she doesn’t attend that school anymore as it is only a K-6 school, and this incident happened when she was 10-11, so clearly she’s no longer in a K-6 school.

“ ******** School provides a safe and supportive environment for students during supervised school hours, which are between 8:45am - 3:15pm”


JMO

I have no idea of the exact circumstances here but surely she would have been under supervision from someone approved or appointed by FACS during this time? Police also have experts who are skilled at dealing with child assault victims. There are many 11 to 12 year Olds who would prefer to spend a few hours talking to police rather than sit in a boring classroom at school.
I'm not sure what evidence there is that this was some sort of unpleasant ordeal for the victim and not something she looked forward to, and provided some chance at justice and a better life for herself, if not for William? She might have even enjoyed being listened to and heard for a change?

 

[Wallace52]

She might have even enjoyed being listened to and heard for a change?

Yeah, she might have. I’m sure she would have wanted justice for her brother.

And everything you said I do agree with.

 

[shorsky]

I'm not sure why McDougall is telling us what the "police's position" is - it's up to the police to tell us that.
Also not sure why she is commenting on the FM, who is not her client. She represents the FF only.
I don't see the 'irony' there, (unless she is using the Alannis Morisette definition).

The irony I do see is Jubelin commenting on the presence of SFR detectives at the sentencing hearing. I would think it is standard police practice for the arresting/charging officers to attend court. One could ask Jubelin why he himself thought it was 'efficient use of resources' for him to be there.

I also don't understand the tone of the magistrate in describing the questions put to the victim as 'leading'. The victim is not on trial here, and detectives are entitled to ask any type of question (including leading ones) to elicit the information they need. It is up to the lawyers in court to object to questions they consider 'leading', and if they do so, the magistrate may rule against such questions being put.

I’m not disagreeing with your comments 31550 - just throwing in some extras of my own.

Wonder if McDougall will now represent them both, save some $ perhaps. Well actually, it’s only former FM that has the threat of future charges, as far as we know currently.

I also wonder as to the reason for this article & lawyer speech - maybe FM is saying ‘bring it on’. They’ve pretty much wiped the floor with everything else that’s been thrown their way - which in itself I find quite appalling.

Not ‘appalling’ if the verdicts / penalties are correct, but ‘appalling’ in so far as ‘ if these charges were warranted, why wasn’t the prosecution case strong enough to make them stick?’ - 1000 hrs of taped evidence for a couple of half-baked ‘ that’s not ok, so do a bit of community penance so I can keep my job’, sentences !

There are huge costs to the public of all these appearances. We’ve a ‘public’ that’s screaming out for funds for things like Health & hospital care, family assistance, social workers, extra Police etc. etc. I feel so angry to see our tax payer $ used so casually.

Gary Jubelin is an ex member of the Police force, who’s on the media books for ‘paid comments’ (imo). He perhaps was attending on that behalf who knows about anything.
However this time I do tend to agree with him - agreed, there’s an interest, but why did 5 of them need to be there ? Fill in the time sheet & say ‘hey, look at all that’s been given to William’s investigation’ ?

I’m so sad to say that I think times up in William’s investigation - unless they can convince Ron Iddles to get involved

Happy Easter everyone & every blessing for the future.

 

[shorsky]

From the same editorial quoted above:

"The devastation of losing William has been compounded by aspects of the police investigation, and has left the reputations of two people in tatters.

Their daughter has been taken from them, and they have been banned from the foster system.

Even though their names have been suppressed it was revealed this week they struggle to find meaningful work and keep their place in the community."

Nothing has changed. It is still all about THEM!! They have lost William, they have been treated badly. And, their daughter? She was never theirs, she was only in their "care". Banned from the foster system, poor dears. Should never have had foster children in the first place, but especially after WT went missing.

What about William?

What about LT, who has been treated abominably??

Aaahh - I’m not aware that they had a daughter. Yes, they had foster daughters, some longer term than others, but here again we see blurring of the lines. They did not lose Their daughter. … they lost fostering privileges of a young girl due to their quite dreadful treatment of her. I was shocked. I was a pretty tuff mother, and kids can test you every way, but you do not speak & act like we heard to a child.

Here was a young girl who still had no answers as to the loss of her little brother, and I would suggest was crying out for understanding & reassurance. And yes, she maybe wasn’t all sweetness & light, coming to that age, most girls aren’t. Did former fosters avail themselves of any of the counselling to assist in their guidance I wonder .

We’re led to believe that they had 12 foster children over time (some prior to the arrival of L & then William). How many after William’s disappearance I wonder, as I’m only aware of the 1 little girl.

Why the focus on ‘adopting’ L & William, even though former FM is on record as saying she can’t cope with him. … were they the only ones who’s parents couldn’t fight enough to get them back ? Or perhaps weren’t assisted enough to get them back.

 

[shorsky]

Homicide police asked a 10-11 year old child a total of 1500 questions over 2 interviews.

That is really interesting.

IMHO, As a child you have to be very competent, bright, and motivated to answer that many questions. I actually think if asked, the child’s bio mother may have been ok with that amount of questions being asked of her daughter, because from what I understand, the bio mother is very committed to finding out the truth about what happened to her son.

Talking about interview questions, I feel like the foster dad would have crumbled after about 80 questions because cognitively he would have started struggling. From the interviews of him that have read, he really struggles to answer questions about himself, his wife, and about William’s disappearance. In one interview he struggled to say how old he was. He really did.

IMHO, it’s easy to answer questions when you have nothing to hide.

Don’t they have to have specialist police interview children ?

And I can’t believe 1500 questions over 2 interviews ! 750 questions per session - that poor girl - how long were those interviews ?
That’s actually unrealistic imo.

Thinking to my time of interviewing, I would have prepared maximum 10 questions for a 30 minute interview!

Maybe that’s a mistake- if not, it needs investigating under child cruelty !

 

[Wallace52]

Maybe that’s a mistake- if not, it needs investigating under child cruelty !

Surely it’s is a mistake on the part of the journalist who wrote this?

There’s no way they asked her that many questions, right?

It has got to be a typo or an editorial error.

Jmo

 

[Wallace52]

An Easter message published by those in charge of the “Where’s William? Bring Him Home Official” Facebook account, which we know is administrated by the foster parents and insight communications.

Log into Facebook

Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.

www.facebook.com

It reads:
“On Easter Sunday morning our thoughts are of William and all those he loved and who continue to live with shattered hearts not knowing what has happened to their precious little boy. Today, on Easter Sunday as we mark 9 years, 6 months and 20 tragic days since William was taken from his happy life, we continue our pledge to never give up on William.
If you know something, say something. NSW Police continue to offer a $1Million reward for information that will lead them to William. Please call Crime Stoppers NOW on 1800 333 000 and help bring William home…”
For more information about William, please visit his website: https://www.whereswilliam.org/
#W#whereswilliamB#BringWilliamHomeB#bringhimhomeO#OneMillionReasonsM#MakeTheCall#W#WilliamTyrrellStillMissing

<attached to this Facebook post is the following photograph:>

 

[Wallace52]

As one would expect any convicted criminal to be. Especially one convicted of assaulting a child (in their care)! Why is this a surprise?

(Did Insight write that editorial?)

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-nsw/police-scrutiny-of-william-tyrrells-foster-parents-extraordinary/news-story/e49e0a6bdc9a079591ca49f226a665bb

31550

IMO: This half baked editorial trash piece represents a last ditch effort from a dying publicity machine, in its final throes, desperate to have the last word in an argument where no one’s listening anymore…..

 

[Lady O]

Homicide police asked a 10-11 year old child a total of 1500 questions over 2 interviews.

That is really interesting.

I don't know where that number came from, but I could see that it would be fairly easy to reach without stressing a child out.

"Hello, can you please tell me your name?
Would you like to come in and sit down?
Are you happy to answer some questions?
We want to ask about when WT went missing, do you remember?
Are you OK with that?
Do you remember what happened the night before?
Did you go to McDonalds on the way to FGM's
Do you remember arriving at FGM's house?
Which bedroom did you sleep in? "
Did you share a bed with FM?"

There is 10 likely questions probably take about 2-3 minutes.

 

[Wallace52]

I don't know where that number came from, but I could see that it would be fairly easy to reach without stressing a child out.

"Hello, can you please tell me your name?
Would you like to come in and sit down?
Are you happy to answer some questions?
We want to ask about when WT went missing, do you remember?
Are you OK with that?
Do you remember what happened the night before?
Did you go to McDonalds on the way to FGM's
Do you remember arriving at FGM's house?
Which bedroom did you sleep in? "
Did you share a bed with FM?"

There is 10 likely questions probably take about 2-3 minutes.

Yeah or maybe like:

“Could you tell me how old you are?”

“Do you know your date of birth?”

“How is your day at school going?”

Etc. Etc.

 

[31550]

The police are required under law to only interview a young person when a responsible adult support person is present. This person can be:

• a young person's parent or carer
• a person independent of the police, selected or agreed upon by the parent or young person (if 14 years or over)
• a lawyer of the young person's own choosing (if 14 years or over)
• a person who has not been concerned in the investigation of the offence and has no interest in the outcome of the investigation
• a Justice of the Peace (as a last resort).

What happens when a young person becomes involved with the police?

It can be difficult for families when a young person is questioned about breaking the law. Find out the rights of young people when they are arrested by police, options such as bail, plus learn about Youth Justice support services.

www.nsw.gov.au

It occurs to me that this might have been a unique opportunity for police to interview LT as her carers or guardians (FACS,) may have previously not consented for this to happen.

The young person does not have to answer any questions, make a statement, or sign a document except if:

they are driving a car

under 18 and drinking alcohol in a public place

suspected of being involved in or witnessing a serious crime

on public transport, or

involved in a car accident.

In this case LT is potentially suspected of witnessing a serious crime. Police may have used the recordings to establish prima facie evidence of this, which may have trumped previous denials for access to interview her.

 

[Wallace52]

The police are required under law to only interview a young person when a responsible adult support person is present. This person can be:

• a young person's parent or carer
• a person independent of the police, selected or agreed upon by the parent or young person (if 14 years or over)
• a lawyer of the young person's own choosing (if 14 years or over)
• a person who has not been concerned in the investigation of the offence and has no interest in the outcome of the investigation
• a Justice of the Peace (as a last resort).

What happens when a young person becomes involved with the police?

It can be difficult for families when a young person is questioned about breaking the law. Find out the rights of young people when they are arrested by police, options such as bail, plus learn about Youth Justice support services.

www.nsw.gov.au

It occurs to me that this might have been a unique opportunity for police to interview LT as her carers or guardians (FACS,) may have previously not consented for this to happen.

The young person does not have to answer any questions, make a statement, or sign a document except if:

they are driving a car

under 18 and drinking alcohol in a public place

suspected of being involved in or witnessing a serious crime

on public transport, or

involved in a car accident.

In this case LT is potentially suspected of witnessing a serious crime. Police may have used the recordings to establish prima facie evidence of this, which may have trumped previous denials for access to interview her.

That is fascinating.

As a witness or a suspect, even in a serious crime, you always have a right to silence.

I hope someone explained that to the little girl before they asked her questions.

IMO

 

[shorsky]

I don't know where that number came from, but I could see that it would be fairly easy to reach without stressing a child out.

"Hello, can you please tell me your name?
Would you like to come in and sit down?
Are you happy to answer some questions?
We want to ask about when WT went missing, do you remember?
Are you OK with that?
Do you remember what happened the night before?
Did you go to McDonalds on the way to FGM's
Do you remember arriving at FGM's house?
Which bedroom did you sleep in? "
Did you share a bed with FM?"

There is 10 likely questions probably take about 2-3 minutes.

Did the interviewer manage to draw breath between each question I wonder, or wait for an answer even ?

 

[Wallace52]

Did the interviewer manage to draw breath between each question I wonder, or wait for an answer even ?

Maybe there were two. Good cop and bad cop.

IMO

 

[Wallace52]

I’m not disagreeing with your comments 31550 - just throwing in some extras of my own.

Wonder if McDougall will now represent them both, save some $ perhaps. Well actually, it’s only former FM that has the threat of future charges, as far as we know currently.

I also wonder as to the reason for this article & lawyer speech - maybe FM is saying ‘bring it on’. They’ve pretty much wiped the floor with everything else that’s been thrown their way - which in itself I find quite appalling.

Not ‘appalling’ if the verdicts / penalties are correct, but ‘appalling’ in so far as ‘ if these charges were warranted, why wasn’t the prosecution case strong enough to make them stick?’ - 1000 hrs of taped evidence for a couple of half-baked ‘ that’s not ok, so do a bit of community penance so I can keep my job’, sentences !

There are huge costs to the public of all these appearances. We’ve a ‘public’ that’s screaming out for funds for things like Health & hospital care, family assistance, social workers, extra Police etc. etc. I feel so angry to see our tax payer $ used so casually.

Gary Jubelin is an ex member of the Police force, who’s on the media books for ‘paid comments’ (imo). He perhaps was attending on that behalf who knows about anything.
However this time I do tend to agree with him - agreed, there’s an interest, but why did 5 of them need to be there ? Fill in the time sheet & say ‘hey, look at all that’s been given to William’s investigation’ ?

There’s approximately 5 homicide team detectives at every single hearing the foster parents have had. Every day of every hearing.

The only exception was maybe the FF lying case (presided over by Magistrate Arms) held at Downing Centre in Nov 2023, where the homicide team didn’t make an appearance until after lunch.

jmo

I’m so sad to say that I think times up in William’s investigation - unless they can convince Ron Iddles to get involved

Happy Easter everyone & every blessing for the future.

Happy Easter.

 

[31550]

Maybe there were two. Good cop and bad cop.

IMO

What would be the role or purpose of a 'bad cop' in the interview of a 12yo victim?

We should consider the possibility that this girl, as a foster child, is likely traumatised in some way, may have emotional, cognitive or communication difficulties. It may require specialised and repeated questioning in different ways to elicit information from her in a reliable and coherent manner.

I don't think 'beating it out of her' would be the recommended approach.

 

[Lady O]

I don't think 'beating it out of her' would be the recommended approach.

That's already been tried.

 

[31550]

That's already been tried.

Yeah, with the wrong person.

 

[LRitz]

The FGM was also there, she clarified where William was playing before he vanished.

I don't think i could use "clarified" and FGM in the same sentence.
Do I recall she thought he left early at 8 to drive 10 minutes to the chemist that opened at 9 at the work call at 9:30. Clear as mud.

 

[LRitz]

And the rocks in the garden. IF he fell off the high balcony, he wasn't just going to land on plants or soft soil. There were rocks as big as WT's head all around the garden area.

Red herring #1: suggested mostly by FGM. Lots of suspects who could have abducted WT. This led to wild goose chase. and as we know ended in tears for many involved.

Red herring #2: possibly suggested by possible unknown/unnamed witness: Has led to another huge wild goose change. IMO will end in tears and will be no closer to finding WT.

It is possible, IMO, WT had and accident or fall. It is possible that a fall from that balcony could result in serious injury or death. But it is possible, IMO, that there never was a fall.

 

[Wallace52]

I thought everyone knew that FM had retained Obi Wan Kenobi on her legal team. Did you miss that Wallace 52.

Seriously though there is little to laugh about here.

Sorry are you replying to my comment?

I don’t know what you are talking about.

 

[Wallace52]

Red herring #1: suggested mostly by FGM. Lots of suspects who could have abducted WT. This led to wild goose chase. and as we know ended in tears for many involved.

Red herring #2: possibly suggested by possible unknown/unnamed witness: Has led to another huge wild goose change. IMO will end in tears and will be no closer to finding WT.

It is possible, IMO, WT had and accident or fall. It is possible that a fall from that balcony could result in serious injury or death. But it is possible, IMO, that there never was a fall.

Oh let me guess.

He was “abducted” by one of the men in the two mystery cars that never existed.

 

[LRitz]

I don't think I have suggested anywhere IMO that there was an abduction.

I said the suspects that were conveniently suggested by the FGM have led to be wrong. And resulted in a lot of time wasting for the investigation.
I am suggesting the present line of investigation will also lead nowhere.