Current Disappearance of 3yo William Tyrrell Pt 2 * FM guilty of assault & intimidation

[Kurve]

Continued from PART 1

Criminal charges the former foster parents currently face as at 15 April 2022 include:

• 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

 

[Wallace52]

William Tyrrell was supposed to turn 13 tomorrow on June 26, 2024.

I’ve attached a photo. Source: The former foster parents Where’s William Facebook page.

 

[31550]

There might be 10 or 20 witnesses in the Crown case, or more.

We don’t know because we haven’t seen the brief. And FM doesn’t know because neither her or her lawyers have seen her brief.

I trust the strike force that they’ve left no stone unturned. I think they’ve got their ducks in a row.


IMO.

Sorry did I miss something? What brief? What Crown case? What charge(s) are we talking about?

 

[Wallace52]

Sorry did I miss something? What brief? What Crown case? What charge(s) are we talking about?

I’ve edited my original post.

Prosecutors to advise on evidence for charges over William Tyrrell's suspected death within months - ABC News

amp.abc.net.au

I was referring to the Crown cases as listed below:


“Detectives have recommended the boy’s foster mother – who cannot be named for legal reasons – be charged with perverting the course of justice and interfering with a corpse, 9 News first reported on Tuesday.



She has always strenuously denied being involved with his disappearance and claims she was not informed of any potential charges against her. The foster mother is not accused of causing the boy’s death.”



https://www.news.com.au/national/cr...n/news-story/a80ad38fa449680309d1746da7ba3d93


To provide a sense of balance to my perspective, I’ll also share that Michael Usher disagrees with my point of view that there were briefs. He thinks the police never had a brief for these charges:


“The leak at that point had no supporting evidence and action. No police turned up to arrest the mother, there was no brief for the DPP. In short, there was nothing. Trust me, when police know they have a case, they make a surprise arrest and the first media know about it is when the suspect is already in custody.

But this leak, a nod and wink to police reporters, torpedoed the anniversary campaign which should have received widespread exposure. It should have put William’s name back out there and appealed for any witnesses. It’s almost as if the investigators didn’t want the public to remember William was missing. That attention might raise legitimate questions for the detectives about why they had no leads and no evidence, despite nine years of searching with extensive resources.

https://thenightly.com.au/opinion/m...-only-derailed-efforts-to-find-him-c-14753127

 

[31550]

Ohhhhh I’m just referring to the one that the NSW POL has taken back off the ODPP.

Prosecutors to advise on evidence for charges over William Tyrrell's suspected death within months - ABC News

amp.abc.net.au

“Detectives have recommended the boy’s foster mother – who cannot be named for legal reasons – be charged with perverting the course of justice and interfering with a corpse, 9 News first reported on Tuesday.



She has always strenuously denied being involved with his disappearance and claims she was not informed of any potential charges against her. The foster mother is not accused of causing the boy’s death.”



https://www.news.com.au/national/cr...n/news-story/a80ad38fa449680309d1746da7ba3d93


In the case of balance, I’ll also share that
Michael Usher disagrees with me. He thinks the police never had a brief for these charges:


“The leak at that point had no supporting evidence and action. No police turned up to arrest the mother, there was no brief for the DPP. In short, there was nothing. Trust me, when police know they have a case, they make a surprise arrest and the first media know about it is when the suspect is already in custody.

But this leak, a nod and wink to police reporters, torpedoed the anniversary campaign which should have received widespread exposure. It should have put William’s name back out there and appealed for any witnesses. It’s almost as if the investigators didn’t want the public to remember William was missing. That attention might raise legitimate questions for the detectives about why they had no leads and no evidence, despite nine years of searching with extensive resources.

https://thenightly.com.au/opinion/m...-only-derailed-efforts-to-find-him-c-14753127

Ok but those charges have not been laid as yet. And there's no certainty they ever will. So the brief is just a draft for consideration by the DPP and the Crown currently has no case.

 

[js47]

My time line

• ?
• Photo roaring like a Lion
• ?
• FM calls police at 10:56

In respect to every one trying to seriously work out the time line I think this is close to the truth definitely.

 

[js47]

But if giving important information to the police wouldn't you take your time and make a great effort to give correct information. Some of the statements were taken just days after, and the search was still in early days. How could you forget. And its not just differences between different people, even their own statements are not always the same. (FGM statement and video walkthrough).
And even before the photo. Breakfast with William and sister at the table is at 9:00 and takes about 10 to 15 minutes. Or, as FGM says, it is at 8:00 and takes an hour. Not small discrepancies.
So if not intentional then what?

How can any one believe William waited hours for breakfast to start with. Would the FF really make him wait I think he had breakfast early with dad. There was miss behaviour with toys wasn’t there? So any sane person would sit the kids down with a bowl of cereal and then think about “high” breakfast. Didn’t William wake at 5 am? Even 6 am breakfast at 8 or 9 would be 2 to 3 hours. Yer…na! Another time line out the window.

 

[Wallace52]

Ok but those charges have not been laid as yet. And there's no certainty they ever will. So the brief is just a draft for consideration by the DPP and the Crown currently has no case.

Well, maybe. Or maybe there is a case, and the Crown have shelved it for now.

What’s the difference between a brief and a draft brief??

 

[Wallace52]

How can any one believe William waited hours for breakfast to start with. Would the FF really make him wait I think he had breakfast early with dad. There was miss behaviour with toys wasn’t there? So any sane person would sit the kids down with a bowl of cereal and then think about “high” breakfast. Didn’t William wake at 5 am? Even 6 am breakfast at 8 or 9 would be 2 to 3 hours. Yer…na! Another time line out the window.

I don’t think they had breaky. I think she threw William and his sister a yakult.

Which would have been demonstrated on autopsy if a body had been found, which didn’t occur.

Just my opinion. I’ve never seen evidence of him being given this scrambled eggs, wheat bix etc that was discussed.

A big trigger for a toddler playing up or demonstrating disregulated behaviour is hunger.

 

[31550]

Well, maybe. Or maybe there is a case, and the Crown have shelved it for now.

What’s the difference between a brief and a draft brief??

A brief is what they go to court with. They must provide a copy to the defence.

What I have called a draft brief is what NSWPol sent the DPP for review and advice. If the DPP were satisfied they could have prosecuted with what the police provided they would have done so. Clearly they were not.

 

[CodyRose]

FGM video walkthrough (my transcription):

When I got down to the road I could see [FM] coming back.
- OK
No, I didn't see [FM]. I saw Anne-Marie, this lady who lives there.
- With the timber paling fence?
Yes, yes, when I was down there talking to her, [FM] came back. [Wms sister] must have been with me. I really don't know.
- OK, and ... you looked around?
It was absolutely deathly quiet.
-OK
Still, nothing. ... and then, ah, I'm down on the road ...
- When you, when you were on the road, do remember seeing any cars, on the road?
No, no, nothing.
- Do you remember seeing any people?
Not at that time. No. No.
- OK
Yeah.... Uhh, a couple did come by after all this had happened and after she'd called the police I don't know if they're ... ,
a car was an the road. An elderly couple. And I said to them 'Have you seen this little boy?' and they said 'No'. But this was some time after all this had happened.
Roughly how long after do you think that would have been?
- Uhhh, that might have been ten minutes because I was down on the road talking to Anne-Marie, and then [FM} came up very distraught and said "I've gotta call the police".
OK, so [FM] came up. You decided to call the police. What, and then, you ...
< interrupting > Oh and then, when I think [FF?]. Oh when did he... ? I think I was walking up, and [FF] arrived, and he was distraught as well .
OK
Uhh how he knew at that stage I'm not too sure. He'd tell you that. I'm not too sure. And then he started running around. Everybody was running around.
...

I don't know. FGM says she first saw FM coming up when she was talking to AMS. Then she says she saw the elderly couple 10 minutes after calling the police, and then she sees FM coming up again saying she needs to call the police!
So the sequence of events is unreliable.

But she does say FF arrived while she (FGM) was walking back up, and somehow he was already distraught. And even though FM said "I have to call the police" she did not do so for another 25 minutes or so.

PS: IF FGM was down on the road the whole time, how did she not see FF return in his car to her house? How come she never mentions FM's drive in her car?

I think the old lady was stressed and tried to remember as best she could.

 

[31550]

I don’t think they had breaky. I think she threw William and his sister a yakult.

Which would have been demonstrated on autopsy if a body had been found, which didn’t occur.

Just my opinion. I’ve never seen evidence of him being given this scrambled eggs type hot breakfast that was discussed.

Remember that they didn't phone FGM until they were well on the way to Kendall. Probably too late for FGM to go out and buy stuff for breakfast. If the kids had cereal and FF had coffee, and they made scrambled eggs with milk, then maybe there wasn't milk for tea at 10am? Did this cause more tension in the house? Maybe the trip in FGM car was actually supposed to get milk or other supplies? Maybe something happened to William related to this trip?

 

[stormbird]

From News.com.au, 25 June 2024:

"A lawyer for both foster parents appeared in Sydney Downing Centre District Court on Tuesday to lodge an appeal against their sentences and convictions.

The Crown prosecutor asked for a three-week adjournment to allow time to co-ordinate the appeal requests. ...

Acting Judge Paul Conlon granted the request and noted the matter would be ready to be set down for an appeal hearing when it returned to court in July."

 

[CodyRose]

But it is a bit more than eyewitnesses. FGM can not recall her own actions. FGM does not just say she saw neighbour AMS, she says she spoke to her. I suppose you could make up a whole conversation, or mix up this time with later in the morning.
Did AMS in her statement say she saw FGM, and if so, was FGM still in her slippers?

Yes all good thoughts. I wonder if the FGM was ordinarily a bit confused or vague due to ill health. She did pass away in the early years if the investigation.

 

[Awakening]

I don’t think they had breaky. I think she threw William and his sister a yakult.

Which would have been demonstrated on autopsy if a body had been found, which didn’t occur.

Just my opinion. I’ve never seen evidence of him being given this scrambled eggs, wheat bix etc that was discussed.

A big trigger for a toddler playing up or demonstrating disregulated behaviour is hunger.

A yakult? Well that’s child abuse in my book.

 

[js47]

A yakult? Well that’s child abuse in my book.

At least they wouldn’t have to eat it with a wooden spoon.

 

[Wallace52]

Yes all good thoughts. I wonder if the FGM was ordinarily a bit confused or vague due to ill health. She did pass away in the early years if the investigation.

The FGM actually became a senior journalist for the Camden Haven Courier in the years that followed. She wrote extremely well. She was no idiot, before or after William disappeared.

She didn’t pass away until circa 6 years into the investigation.

 

[31550]

The FGM actually became a senior journalist for the Camden Haven Courier in the years that followed. She wrote extremely well. She was no idiot, before or after William disappeared.

She didn’t pass away until circa 6 years into the investigation.

After FGM moved house, she stayed in the Kendall area? Do we know if FF and FM visited her regularly between 2014 and her death?

 

[LRitz]

I think the old lady was stressed and tried to remember as best she could.

"The old lady"! Careful CodyRose you may be ruffling a few feathers amongst the big foot forum there.
QE II was certainly an old lady. But she continued her job into her nineties. No indication of mental confusion, even when stressed or ill. Not all oldies or grannies (great grannies) have dementia.

FGM short term memory seemed pretty good to me, IMO. She remembered clearly the day before, Thursday. She remembered the name and address of the two repair people. She remembered details about the chemist and that William had his special orange juice. (FM also says William had orange juice). These are quite detailed comments. She remembered not seeing the mystery cars.

It would have been a stressful morning but was that the best she could do? I think that keeping to the fosters narrative of the morning would have been the thing that caused stress, IMO. And if you find yourself in trouble, everything becomes a blur. i think she does look stressed in her walkthrough in her kitchen ( moving her hands), but for what reason?

Edit: and the stress may have actually helped her remember. If I was asked when and what I had for breakfast 10 days ago (unstressed) it would probably be a bit of a bur. But this was not a usual day. She would have (presumably ) been asked on the Friday or soon after, details of what happened that morning even if the statement was some days later.

 

[js47]

After FGM moved house, she stayed in the Kendall area? Do we know if FF and FM visited her regularly between 2014 and her death?

Good point. Because I think they weren’t on speaking terms when they left or am I wrong? WHY?
FGM was a reporter so she would be INTO DETAILS and in her walk through she was ashamed the beds were not made. It appears to me she liked every thing in its place like maybe what actually did happen that day and she was not going to change it even for her daughter.

 

[31550]

"The old lady"! Careful CodyRose you may be ruffling a few feathers amongst the big foot forum there.
QE II was certainly an old lady. But she continued her job into her nineties. No indication of mental confusion, even when stressed or ill. Not all oldies or grannies (great grannies) have dementia.

FGM short term memory seemed pretty good to me, IMO. She remembered clearly the day before, Thursday. She remembered the name and address of the two repair people. She remembered details about the chemist and that William had his special orange juice. (FM also says William had orange juice). These are quite detailed comments. She remembered not seeing the mystery cars.

It would have been a stressful morning but was that the best she could do? I think that keeping to the fosters narrative of the morning would have been the thing that caused stress, IMO. And if you find yourself in trouble, everything becomes a blur. i think she does look stressed in her walkthrough in her kitchen ( moving her hands), but for what reason?

I think you are on the mark. She is very confident about providing some answers, and very shaky about others. Maybe it's because she didn't remember, or maybe it's because she was trying to stick to a narrative, or conceal certain other details, without flat-out lying? But it's hard to tell which.

Surely she would remember whether William's sister was with her or not? Would she have really got up and followed FM down to the road without knowing where William's sister was? Or did she just not care? If her immediate thought was "He's been taken!", as she claims, why was there no concern for William's sister? Would you let her out of your sight?

But she is really adamant about how FF was not there at all - almost as though she is trying to exonerate him?

And she provides a lot of unrequested 'fluff' about William's demeanour and behaviour which seems at odds with the 'everyone was happy' assertion. It's as though she was told to say 'everyone was happy', but the parts about William getting fed up, and being boisterous, and not rolling the dice correctly are surely not part of any rehearsed narrative, and are very believable IMO.

It's like 'everyone was happy' at first , but then it all went to **** and "this is where it all happened" - some incident / altercation / accident perhaps?

 

[LRitz]

I think you are on the mark. She is very confident about providing some answers, and very shaky about others. Maybe it's because she didn't remember, or maybe it's because she was trying to stick to a narrative, or conceal certain other details, without flat-out lying? But it's hard to tell which.

Surely she would remember whether William's sister was with her or not? Would she have really got up and followed FM down to the road without knowing where William's sister was? Or did she just not care? If her immediate thought was "He's been taken!", as she claims, why was there no concern for William's sister? Would you let her out of your sight?

But she is really adamant about how FF was not there at all - almost as though she is trying to exonerate him?

And she provides a lot of unrequested 'fluff' about William's demeanour and behaviour which seems at odds with the 'everyone was happy' assertion. It's as though she was told to say 'everyone was happy', but the parts about William getting fed up, and being boisterous, and not rolling the dice correctly are surely not part of any rehearsed narrative, and are very believable IMO.

It's like 'everyone was happy' at first , but then it all went to **** and "this is where it all happened" - some incident / altercation / accident perhaps?

Lots of possibilities I agree. Including just forgot, it was a "blur".

The narrative could have been "happy" families. Possible FGM could not help herself, and just had to put it out there that William was not a perfect angel, blame the victim - all just other possible IMO. How did she get on with FF? why did she confuse his departure time, and then say the kids had breakfast for one hour, which in my experience is way too long for preschool kids to sit still for breakfast. Maybe she is resentful now that she is involved in any of this. All IMO.

I agree that sister's location just after William has gone down the side of house is unbelievable. the FGM says (words to the effect) when questioned if LT was with her - "she must have been". Sounds to me she is making up the story as she goes. IMO

 

[LRitz]

...But she is really adamant about how FF was not there at all - almost as though she is trying to exonerate him?

Why was that?
FGM confused with some things but FF - Definitely not there for breakfast.

 

[stormbird]

"The old lady"! Careful CodyRose you may be ruffling a few feathers amongst the big foot forum there.
QE II was certainly an old lady. But she continued her job into her nineties. No indication of mental confusion, even when stressed or ill. Not all oldies or grannies (great grannies) have dementia.

FGM short term memory seemed pretty good to me, IMO. She remembered clearly the day before, Thursday. She remembered the name and address of the two repair people. She remembered details about the chemist and that William had his special orange juice. (FM also says William had orange juice). These are quite detailed comments. She remembered not seeing the mystery cars.

It would have been a stressful morning but was that the best she could do? I think that keeping to the fosters narrative of the morning would have been the thing that caused stress, IMO. And if you find yourself in trouble, everything becomes a blur. i think she does look stressed in her walkthrough in her kitchen ( moving her hands), but for what reason?

Edit: and the stress may have actually helped her remember. If I was asked when and what I had for breakfast 10 days ago (unstressed) it would probably be a bit of a bur. But this was not a usual day. She would have (presumably ) been asked on the Friday or soon after, details of what happened that morning even if the statement was some days later.

re: "... William had his special orange juice. (FM also says William had orange juice)."

LRitz, I think you might have mentioned orange juice a few times recently? (Sorry if it was someone else.)

What's the significance, or what are you talking about? Thanks.

I think these would be the statements you're referring to, but maybe there are others?

From FM's witness statement on 14 Sep 2014 (see post 397), from paragraph 15:

[FM] "We had a late breaky around 8.30am. William and toast, eggs and weatbix. William also had some orange juice. [The MFC] had some toast with us and he was getting ready for his meeting. Mum also head breaky with us."

From FGM's walk-through, 18 Sep 2014 (see post 7,014 or go direct to Google Drive; transcript by me):

FGM: We sat there at the table, had breakfast. (Bleeped; FM?) cooked scrambled eggs, we all had scrambled eggs, orange juice...

Detective: Yep.

FGM: ... toast...

 

[stormbird]

From 9 News / AAP, 26 June 2024:

"A magistrate's finding that William Tyrrell's former foster mother was not guilty of intimidating another child could be challenged by prosecutors.

The foster parents, who cannot be legally named, have appealed the convictions and severity of sentences they were handed for the assault and intimidation of a child who is not William.

In March [2024], Magistrate Susan McIntyre found that the mother's threats to slap the child amounted to intimidation. ...

McIntyre cleared the foster mother of five counts of intimidation and dismissed one charge against the foster father of assaulting the child. ...

The Crown had filed an application for an extension of time to consider its own appeal of the woman's acquittal on the intimidation charges, a prosecutor told Sydney's Downing Centre District Court yesterday.

However, a final decision about whether an appeal would be brought has not been made.

The matters have been adjourned until July 16, when a hearing date will be set down."

 

[Wallace52]

The Crown had filed an application for an extension of time to consider its own appeal of the woman's acquittal on the intimidation charges, a prosecutor told Sydney's Downing Centre District Court yesterday.

Well that’s always the danger when one appeals. Sometimes the result is worse than the original result.

IMO