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

 

[js47]

If the dad hit him with the car I think W would scream.

 

[js47]

William was 3 his language skills and the fact he HAD to behave may have been more to the level of yelling to make some one understand that is why people heard children playing.
If sound carried that well then why didn’t FM or FGM hear anything? Also Some one made tea so if the sliders to the balcony were still open even more so.
Na! W had to have been left to his own devices for quite a while. He had no toys so I have to wonder if he heard the call of the swings OR HIS BIKE remember he went to day care he would be used to finding something to play. Was he one on one? If not he would entertain himself.
An open garage, piles of leaves etc
Odd to let kids hide and seek in a garden in a bush area snakes spiders etc.
I really cannot lean toward abduction.
IMO there was an accident. One day I hope we will be privileged to know more but I sincerely hope some solid facts for his mother father gran and siblings.

 

[31550]

Please check again. The article I posted. She was spotted in car toward the riding school as informed by investigators. 23 year one

Yes. "Investigators claim that ....".
But that is not a quote or an attribution.
It's the same as "Police believe ... "

Investigators may mean police or may not.
They may claim what they like, but they may claim incorrectly.

They do not say WHO is claimed to have seen her, when or where.

Without naming the witness and the details, including HOW they know it was FM or FgMs car, this is not a piece of evidence that is useful. It sounds more like a fishing expedition to me.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Yes. "Investigators claim that ....".
But that is not a quote or an attribution.
It's the same as "Police believe ... "

Investigators may mean police or may not.
They may claim what they like, but they may claim incorrectly.

They do not say WHO is claimed to have seen her, when or where.

Without naming the witness and the details, including HOW they know it was FM or FgMs car, this is not a piece of evidence that is useful. It sounds more like a fishing expedition to me.

I disagree. It certainly isn't conclusive and isn't evidence per se regarding the case but it still has a degree of persuasiveness. After all, ALL evidence has degrees of persuasiveness attached to them..this is on the lower end because of source being media and may involve embellishment but to dismiss it totally given we work with only snippets ....well you will never accumulate anything..at days end I'm trying to accumulate bits of persuasive evidence that can contribute to a viable solution on what happened..unverified sure but better than nothing at all.

The effective thrust of what was in the media space was that a new piece of evidence arose that creates their interest in that cnr. This article fills the gap AND is consistent with what FM told us that a truck driver saw her..The possibility existed that someone would come forward and fill that void. Now we are told that investigators have indicated she was seen. They then do a massive search in that exact location. That follows earlier articles which postulated that she was on BC Rd and perhaps threw an object. All pieces of information converge to aid persuasiveness