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

 

[Sammy 72]

Hi truecrimepath what do you think of this app https://29a.ch/photo-forensics/?fbc...07o_aem_PWGgSmnJ6bf8BqbwR-JrZQ#exif-meta-data

some people stay in their slippers and dressing gowns all morning, or day sometimes.
Not just elderly people.

Could be L wearing same outfit as the foster hadn't done washing for 3 months there was a lot of tension in that household that morning as FM stated ff was annoyed so she said to him she would manage the kids the whole situation has not been the best at all.. ff getting William to change his own pull ups no breakfast till at least 8am yet William woke alot earlier

 

[31550]

Is it 100% clear that the paper is from Sep 2014?

No but that is what is stated by Chumley. The newspaper would have been on the premises when police arrived, so they could and should have taken photographs of the verandah at the time to verify the FM account of events. They certainly should have noted what FGM FM and LT were wearing, also the items on the verandah - drawing materials, drink bottles, pot plants etc. These should all have been there when the photos were taken. If the photos were not handed over on the Friday, they were provided within a few days, at which stage police could have easily verified their authenticity against items on the verandah and LTs clothing. Both the newspaper FGM was reading and the new one FF bought should have been taken by police as evidence. I don't think any of this happened, and that is a massive failure on behalf of NSWPOL as it would have prevented alibis being invented, but also might have removed all doubt about the authenticity of the photographs and the fosters narrative.

 

[31550]

some people stay in their slippers and dressing gowns all morning, or day sometimes.
Not just elderly people.

Except that 12 months earlier FGM was in good health, FGF was alive. If the foster "grandchildren" were visiting, would she have been in dressing gown and slippers at 11:30?

 

[Underarrest_]

It looks to me that FGM is dressed in this photo on the balcony. Looks like long pants and maybe a cardigan (possibly a robe over the top) and her slippers with her socks.
FD has different bottoms, blue not pink like the ones she was wearing the night before at McDonald’s.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Well if you are going to be so obstinate, then I might do it (one day in the not too distant future), seeing as how I led much
of the questioning research of the weather and sun angle/position with this proof of life photo issue years back.

Not happy with all this ganging up on a new poster.
Grossly unfair and disrespectful IMO.

What to one person is 'ganging up' is to another just asking questions & raising issue. I have a very clear conscience.

 

[Underarrest_]

View attachment 2134314
It looks to me that FGM is dressed in this photo on the balcony. Looks like long pants and maybe a cardigan (possibly a robe over the top) and her slippers with her socks.
FD has different bottoms, blue not pink like the ones she was wearing the night before at McDonald’s.

Actually at a closer look, FGM could be wearing pajama pants

 

[Wallace52]

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 don’t think she is wearing the same coat at McDonalds. Similar colour? Yes. But the same? No.

IMO

 

[Kurve]

View attachment 2134314
It looks to me that FGM is dressed in this photo on the balcony. Looks like long pants and maybe a cardigan (possibly a robe over the top) and her slippers with her socks.
FD has different bottoms, blue not pink like the ones she was wearing the night before at McDonald’s.

FD is wearing her play clothes under her dressing gown. If she's dressed for the day why wouldn't she be wearing the coat she had on the previous night in McDonalds, over her dressing gown?

Maybe because it's the same item she was wearing the night before, it's comfortable and she likes it.

 

[Kurve]

I don’t think she is wearing the same coat at McDonalds. Similar colour? Yes. But the same? No.

IMO

If it was belted up to go in to McDonalds it would hike up a bit? The dressing gown she's wearing on the back porch doesn't look terribly long.

 

[Underarrest_]

FD is wearing her play clothes under her dressing gown. If she's dressed for the day why wouldn't she be wearing the coat she had on the previous night in McDonalds, over her dressing gown?

Maybe because it's the same item she was wearing the night before, it's comfortable and she likes it.

Yes agree, I was meaning FD has different clothes on, as Sammy 72 mentioned FD could have been wearing the same clothes as night before. I think the dressing gown is probably the same one. I wouldn’t think you’d wash a dressing gown after every wear.

 

[shorsky]

They got there after dark? She was 4yo.

So they didn’t leave straight from daycare? They went home first and got changed it seems, kids into pyjamas - except they forgot to put William’s pull-ups on and had to stop on side of road to do that ( didn’t even do it in Maccas parents room )

 

[shorsky]

It's a blue belted dressing gown. Given Chumley attended the Coroner's Inquiry every day, she'd know what it was.


View attachment 2133900

That’s talking about when they were on the deck - not at McDonalds enroute. anyway no big deal

 

[shorsky]

Except it looks too short to be the dressing gown. If it is it's apparently shrunk or she's outgrown it. Are we looking at the same image.

View attachment 2134036

Not a dressing gown imo. Thank you for this pic. She seems to have tights or leggings on; William in shorts. He looks skinny but reasonably tall, with dark hair.

 

[shorsky]

Unlikely to be the same outfit at Maccas as what was worn the next day.
Remember that the children were collected from daycare and driven directly towards Kendall, not stopping until they got to McDonalds. So they would have been dressed in whatever they wore to daycare. It was only after the McDonalds stop they (allegedly) made another stop to put pullups on the children.

Cheers 31550, that’s what I thought happened too.

I think L is wearing a dress over tights or leggings.

 

[stormbird]

"Mistaken", episode 1, Witness: William Tyrrell, 08 Oct 2024

https://omny.fm/shows/witness/mistaken-1

A podcast series by Dan Box and news.com.au

 

[Poppy Penny]

"Mistaken", episode 1, Witness: William Tyrrell, 08 Oct 2024

https://omny.fm/shows/witness/mistaken-1

A podcast series by Dan Box and news.com.au

Very mixed feelings after listening to this episode.

 

[truecrimepath]

Is it 100% clear that the paper is from Sep 2014?

You can barely see anything on the paper to give its correct date. Just more made up nonsense. Like to see their proof.

 

[truecrimepath]

IF it's the same coat at Maccas, as the FD was wearing on the porch at Kendall when the Spiderman images were taken just before William disappeared, it is likely the image was taken on the day and not 12 or 18 months prior.

If its the same coat, it appears smaller in the Maccas photo, in which case the photos are definitely 12-18 months earlier.

 

[Wallace52]

A man once considered a “person of interest” by police investigating the disappearance of three-year-old William Tyrrell had a “shrine” to the missing child at the end of his bed.


The collage of images, discovered in the years after William went missing and featuring photographs of him from media reports, dominated a wall in the man’s isolated house near where the toddler was reported missing.

https://www.news.com.au/national/crime/former-william-tyrrell-suspect-had-shrine-to-missing-boy/news-story/1fbf310d22250c00a8cc2de081d9e77b

 

[truecrimepath]

A man once considered a “person of interest” by police investigating the disappearance of three-year-old William Tyrrell had a “shrine” to the missing child at the end of his bed.


The collage of images, discovered in the years after William went missing and featuring photographs of him from media reports, dominated a wall in the man’s isolated house near where the toddler was reported missing.

https://www.news.com.au/national/crime/former-william-tyrrell-suspect-had-shrine-to-missing-boy/news-story/1fbf310d22250c00a8cc2de081d9e77b

Do you think its just more rubbish to muddy the waters by the communications company associated with the foster family?

Its not coming from the police.

 

[31550]

If its the same coat, it appears smaller in the Maccas photo, in which case the photos are definitely 12-18 months earlier.

So, you are suggesting that FM had another digital camera 12-18 months earlier which she took the 5 pictures with on the verandah at FGM house in 2013. FGM, FF, and FM all kept the exact clothes they were wearing that day (as well as LT's blue coat), so they could come back 12-18 months later and stage a disappearance? But they bought a new digital camera in Bali in July 2014, and transferred all the photos onto it, manipulating the timestamps and EXIF data, but still creating a time discrepancy. And police have been unable to detect that these five photos were actually taken with a different digital camera 12-18 months earlier? OK.

 

[Wallace52]

Do you think its just more rubbish to muddy the waters by the communications company associated with the foster family?

Its not coming from the police.

Well, obviously.

IMO it’s all about #teamfosters (and we know who’s on their “team”) muck racking to create reasonable doubt in law enforcement’s case against the FM.

 

[truecrimepath]

So, you are suggesting that FM had another digital camera 12-18 months earlier which she took the 5 pictures with on the verandah at FGM house in 2013. FGM, FF, and FM all kept the exact clothes they were wearing that day (as well as LT's blue coat), so they could come back 12-18 months later and stage a disappearance? But they bought a new digital camera in Bali in July 2014, and transferred all the photos onto it, manipulating the timestamps and EXIF data, but still creating a time discrepancy. And police have been unable to detect that these five photos were actually taken with a different digital camera 12-18 months earlier? OK.

Get up to speed with EXIF and its manipulation. There are ways of creating false time stamps. It's not that difficult, it takes about 5 minutes to do. Do you know why the police want to find the missing phone? Maybe it is connected.

Given that you know about the EXIF of the photos and what the police know. Please provide it

 

[truecrimepath]

That image is a bit skewed but I'd suggest the actual length on the dressing gown is mid thigh or a bit longer.

I've mentioned it because we can all focus on William but we need to also take in to account what others in the images were wearing. If you're inclined to suggest the Spiderman image was taken 12 months or more prior, a similar test if very limited for obvious reasons, could also be made given the FD would be a year younger as well.

I have done that as much as I could. The only details is her hand grip in which she has a thumb over. Her grip is immature for a child of 4 years and 9 months. Closer to a three year old. This is not proof. There are no other published images of the FD that I can find.

 

[truecrimepath]

At what time of the year?

When I did the shadow analysis of the pink water bottle. It came up with mid may. the elevation of the sun is about 38 degrees at about noon. However I think there are too many sources of error in the photo top be reliable. It's not how I dated the photo.