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

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Raging Bull explain this
View attachment 2133332

My user name is angry red bull (ARB for short)

At best what it raises is a question mark regarding weather status. You want to cherry pick. I won't test any websites because absent you detailing your theory it simply wastes my time for unspecified purpose. Outline your theory please

People here are very open minded.

So WT visited FGM place a few months prior ( when we are told he didn't), wearing a suit which he already owned not having been bought on the holiday. The photos produced earlier were used to promote proof of life on the day to allow something to happen earlier? Is that the theory?

Neighbours heard the children playing just before and just after 9. If what they heard was true then this swapping of photos you suggest gives the FPs about an extra 20 -30 minutes. it runs the risk that the scam would be detected because FPs are on record as saying they hadn't visited in quite some time which could be easily fact checked with neighbours. They are also on record as having bought the suit in Bali I recall. Both of these things could be fact checked by LE.

 

[Lady O]

I more mean, how convinced were they (available evidence) that FM dumped/disposed of William (which is a horrific act), to leave LT in their care. The abuse of LT was only uncovered due to this surveillance. They didn’t need surveillance to prove abuse. LT had disclosed this to her school. In most cases CP would interview the child and remove them.

"The abuse of LT was only uncovered due to this surveillance. They didn’t need surveillance to prove abuse. LT had disclosed this to her school."

I don't know about the timing of uncovering the abuse via surveillance and LT's disclosure of abuse. However, your statement above seems contradictory.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

In this photo the body to head ratio is 2.2.View attachment 2133392

Because his mouth is open, I have adjusted the line on the side of the null hypothesis.

You are comparing a child seated and slouching with a ratio of 2.2 (a calculation I can't verify) with child standing and upright at 3.06 ( a calculation I also can't verify) and trying to draw meaningful conclusions. it's not a scientific analysis.

You've clearly satisfied yourself the verandah shots were many months earlier. Based upon the shots I'm unconvinced

 

[truecrimepath]

There is one witness who lived across the road who heard children playing. She did not see them. She made this statement a long time after the disappearance. The other witness PS recanted hearing the children.

So we have one witness who lived across that thought she heard children. That's it. Witness testimony the further you get away from the event gets clouded and muddled. I don't consider this necessarily reliable.

I had privileged conversation with a Port Macquarie police officer before Gary Jubelin got involved. They did not consider the story being untrue until 3-4 months after the abduction. That's how poor the investigation was. Every opportunity to seize devices was lost. The FP even knocked their house down in Sydney before anyone twigged.

I am concentrating on the Photos because that's all we have that can be looked at. I have WT at a biological age closer to age 2 than 38 months. The photos as far as I can tell were not taken in 2014. His hand grip is age 2-3. Williams sister hand grip is age 3-4. She was 4 years and 9 months when William disappeared. You can't rely on handgrip as a definitive marker of developmental age, it's contributory in that it suggests both he and his sister were younger in the Photo. There is to much variation to be confident. Because he was a foster child he may have had this assessed previously. The next feature is the body head ratio. William is his own control in this. The photo I showed that the ratio was 3. In the photos its a maximum of 2.4. People do not shrink at this age. Because of the image angle the ratio of the control could be higher. The internal control is the head measurement. The difference between 2.4 and 3 suggests that the images were taken as much as 18 months apart.

The theory to date is he is closer to two in age than three.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

There is one witness who lived across the road who heard children playing. She did not see them. She made this statement a long time after the disappearance. The other witness PS recanted hearing the children.

So we have one witness who lived across that thought she heard children. That's it. Witness testimony the further you get away from the event gets clouded and muddled. I don't consider this necessarily reliable.

I had privileged conversation with a Port Macquarie police officer before Gary Jubelin got involved. They did not consider the story being untrue until 3-4 months after the abduction. That's how poor the investigation was. Every opportunity to seize devices was lost. The FP even knocked their house down in Sydney before anyone twigged.

I am concentrating on the Photos because that's all we have that can be looked at. I have WT at a biological age closer to age 2 than 38 months. The photos as far as I can tell were not taken in 2014. His hand grip is age 2-3. Williams sister hand grip is age 3-4. She was 4 years and 9 months when William disappeared. You can't rely on handgrip as a definitive marker of developmental age, it's contributory in that it suggests both he and his sister were younger in the Photo. There is to much variation to be confident. Because he was a foster child he may have had this assessed previously. The next feature is the body head ratio. William is his own control in this. The photo I showed that the ratio was 3. In the photos its a maximum of 2.4. People do not shrink at this age. Because of the image angle the ratio of the control could be higher. The internal control is the head measurement. The difference between 2.4 and 3 suggests that the images were taken as much as 18 months apart.

The theory to date is he is closer to two in age than three.

I suspect you have PS retracting his evidence out of context..I raised this very point quite some time ago and was corrected that he didn't retract entirely his evidence only that he hadn't heard them at a certain point. And I was provided with coroner excepts to correct my view.

I'll have to track down the posts

 

[Kurve]

There is one witness who lived across the road who heard children playing. She did not see them. She made this statement a long time after the disappearance. The other witness PS recanted hearing the children.

So we have one witness who lived across that thought she heard children. That's it. Witness testimony the further you get away from the event gets clouded and muddled. I don't consider this necessarily reliable.

I had privileged conversation with a Port Macquarie police officer before Gary Jubelin got involved. They did not consider the story being untrue until 3-4 months after the abduction. That's how poor the investigation was. Every opportunity to seize devices was lost. The FP even knocked their house down in Sydney before anyone twigged.

I am concentrating on the Photos because that's all we have that can be looked at. I have WT at a biological age closer to age 2 than 38 months. The photos as far as I can tell were not taken in 2014. His hand grip is age 2-3. Williams sister hand grip is age 3-4. She was 4 years and 9 months when William disappeared. You can't rely on handgrip as a definitive marker of developmental age, it's contributory in that it suggests both he and his sister were younger in the Photo. There is to much variation to be confident. Because he was a foster child he may have had this assessed previously. The next feature is the body head ratio. William is his own control in this. The photo I showed that the ratio was 3. In the photos its a maximum of 2.4. People do not shrink at this age. Because of the image angle the ratio of the control could be higher. The internal control is the head measurement. The difference between 2.4 and 3 suggests that the images were taken as much as 18 months apart.

The theory to date is he is closer to two in age than three.

Have you taken in to account the FD is wearing a blue dressing gown at McDonald's and the same dressing gown in the spiderman pictures?

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Have you taken in to account the FD is wearing a blue dressing gown at McDonald's and the same dressing gown in the spiderman pictures?

If we are talking about 12-18 month old photos she would have outgrown the dressing gown

 

[Underarrest_]

"The abuse of LT was only uncovered due to this surveillance. They didn’t need surveillance to prove abuse. LT had disclosed this to her school."

I don't know about the timing of uncovering the abuse via surveillance and LT's disclosure of abuse. However, your statement above seems contradictory.

Oh geez trying to explain, not very well obviously.
putting any abuse aside, how sure were police that FM was guilty of committing a horrific crime, to leave LT in their care. This is a FC under the guardianship of FACC. If they had explosive evidence that FM removed William’s corpse and dumped him, I’d think they would have removed LT.

 

[truecrimepath]

this is what 3 looks like

Have you taken in to account the FD is wearing a blue dressing gown at McDonald's and the same dressing gown in the spiderman pictures?

I think it's a blue dress at mc Donalds. I don't think its a dressing gown?

 

[Kurve]

this is what 3 looks like

I think it's a blue dress at mc Donalds. I don't think its a dressing gown?

We looked in to this, the discussion will be somewhere in Pt 1.

It was confirmed as a dressing gown in Searching for Spiderman iirc, by Ally Chumley.

 

[Lady O]

Oh geez trying to explain, not very well obviously.
putting any abuse aside, how sure were police that FM was guilty of committing a horrific crime, to leave LT in their care. This is a FC under the guardianship of FACC. If they had explosive evidence that FM removed William’s corpse and dumped him, I’d think they would have removed LT.

I don't know much about Police surveillance via hidden recordings, however I suspect that there was not someone sitting listening in 24/7. Most likely they were trying to find out if there was any conversation about WT that might give them a clue as to what happened to him. They obviously had a suspicion that they were being misled, but I doubt they were expecting that it would record the abuse of LT. When someone was tasked with going through what would have been hours and hours of recordings and came across this, it could have been weeks or even months after the event. And as I said, with LT being the "good child" they must have thought that WT may have copped even worse abuse. The theory of the accident and hiding of the body most likely developed from the recordings as well as other evidence and information they had received together with their own opinion of FM.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Paul S said he did hear the children while he was sitting on his patio sometime after 9 am. He said he didn't hear or see them when returning home from his daily walk at 8:50 am (when he would have been walking from Batar Creek Road along Benaroon Drive, past FGM's southern lawn and past the location where the two parked cars weren't).

Tweets by @LiaJHarris from the inquest hearing 22 August 2019:

Craddock stops the video and clarifies he [Paul S] arrived home about 8.50am from the morning walk. “Did you see the children at number 48 Benaroon drive?” He asks. Mr Savage answered no. “Did you hear them?”. He answered no.

Savage tells detectives in the video he knew his wife was home when he arrived home from his walk because the front door was open. He tells them he didn’t see or hear anyone on the street.

Mr Savage tells detectives he doesn’t recall seeing the foster parents car in the driveway at 48 Benaroon Drive when he arrived home from his walk.

And re Judy W's departure time: Missing William Tyrrell (2021 revised edition, p. 202) says she left home at 9 am.

If those reports are correct, Judy heard the kids before 9am and Paul heard them after.

This is the clarification.

 

[Underarrest_]

I don't know much about Police surveillance via hidden recordings, however I suspect that there was not someone sitting listening in 24/7. Most likely they were trying to find out if there was any conversation about WT that might give them a clue as to what happened to him. They obviously had a suspicion that they were being misled, but I doubt they were expecting that it would record the abuse of LT. When someone was tasked with going through what would have been hours and hours of recordings and came across this, it could have been weeks or even months after the event. And as I said, with LT being the "good child" they must have thought that WT may have copped even worse abuse. The theory of the accident and hiding of the body most likely developed from the recordings as well as other evidence and information they had received together with their own opinion of FM.

Yes whatever reason they put FP under surveillance re William’s disappearance, it couldn’t have been overwhelming (but as you said more suspicion) as they left LT in their care. (They only removed LT because of the abuse they observed in the recordings) as far as we’re aware anyway.
More solid evidence re William’s disappearance might have come from the surveillance but we don’t know that so far.
This might come out in the inquest.

 

[31550]

Are you saying children's bodies shrink with age?

No. I never said that. Children grow at different rates. There is no set formula to determine age from body size. Nor is there a way of precisely determining a child's size or age from a photograph, because of the infinitely variable effects of lenses, lighting, and perspective.
What exactly are YOU trying to say?

 

[Angry Red Bull]

It's jumping all over the place. Your site is now saying it was scattered showers.
https://www.timeanddate.com/weather/@2161654/historic?month=9&year=2014

You record a location, hit past and a series of months and years arises asking for a selection after which you then scroll down the page and punch in the day and the hourly changes are presented.