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

 

[LRitz]

I don’t know why I get the feeling that the not relationship between FM and her siblings is not a close one…possibly not even too civil.

I’m wondering now if the Sister actually came to ‘rescue’ FGM from the trauma of what was going on at her home.

It has been previously suggested that FM's sister could have been the witness with more information. What if: FGM confides in FM's sister (or other family member) some information, but FGM asks her to keep it confidential as it will harm FGM. After FGM dies, FM's sister shares this information with police. No need to protect FGM.

But what if the information given to FM's sister (or other family member or friend of FGM) is not correct. Say FM's sister is getting suspicious of what happened to William and asking lots of questions, or FGM lets slip something and has to cover herself. FGM makes up story about an accident, fall from balcony, and drive to Cobb and Co. FGM says it was all a terrible accident, nothing criminal, and that FM should not have hidden the body but it was done in a panic. And don't tell police as it would mean that FGM would be facing criminal charges. So when FM's sister (or other family member or friend of FGM) tells this story to the police she is convinced that it is true and so are the police.

Again all IMO. Police must have had some reason to do that huge costly dig in such a specific spot. And then find nothing! And police alleging or believing that there was a fall from the balcony is very specific.

Edit: The fall from balcony is specific. Police are not saying... "an accident, misadventure, for example he could have fallen off the balcony" The police are saying their allegation is the fall from the balcony. Am I correct in thinking this??

We have discussed many other possible causes for injuries, but not locked in the balcony fall. What about electrocution from faulty washing machine. As no one else was there at the house, how could the police know this. Or is it smoke and mirrors, and their best guess. Again, confusing.

 

[LRitz]

And for William to leave the property he had to be in a car which drove all the way up and down Benaroon Drive. Which cars have been identified which did that?

Unless they left by the dirt road that led into the state forest.
Which could be easily done in a 4WD

 

[Angry Red Bull]

At the beginning of the week , I was scoffed at for thinking Craddock was going to throw the police under the bus. It looks to me they are definitely under the bus with the back wheel rolling towards them.

The problem seems to me that ‘they form a theory’ then try to prove it. Internationally this has lead to many miscarriages of justice. The result is that policing and investigation changed. Now it’s more evidence focused overseas and has lead to cultural change. The NSW police are stuck in a different paradigm that needs to change.

The process of LE necessarily encompasses formulating hypotheses for the crime. Unavoidable. The important thing is process and procedure. Ie it should have been established as crime scene from day one and the FPs should have been the first to be focus profile tells you 97% are people known.. they believed them.

Then GJ came in and he had a set manner of determining guilt or innocence revolving entirely around listening devices and self incrimination which DIDN'T work either.

So there is nothing wrong with theories so long as process and procedure are adhered to in that path. They weren't. Now it's too late it seems

 

[Earls Smother]

At the beginning of the week , I was scoffed at for thinking Craddock was going to throw the police under the bus. It looks to me they are definitely under the bus with the back wheel rolling towards them.

The problem seems to me that ‘they form a theory’ then try to prove it. Internationally this has lead to many miscarriages of justice. The result is that policing and investigation changed. Now it’s more evidence focused overseas and has lead to cultural change. The NSW police are stuck in a different paradigm that needs to change.

None of us are experts and are not privy to all the information. So we observe and form opinions with what is publicly available.

It does seem though that what you say has some merit. To me, if you have a task force working on a case, there are enough resources to spread your focus from the beginning. In this case, they seem to have taken turns moving their focus from one target to the next. Then, as you say, they try to make it fit.

I've read they've only had 1 analyst involved. We heard there have been 1700 POI's of which 730-odd are still relevant. Why haven't more resources been thrown at categorically eliminating as many of those as possible? So what if highly trained detectives have to sit and sift through CCTV, toll/speed gantries, or whatever else to eliminate vehicles and persons of interest. To leave that job to one person because "that's her job" is ridiculous.

I've always had a strong interest in the Bung Siriboon case (obviously Vicpol). The Puma taskforce (12 detectives) worked their way through a list of 200ish known sex offenders to no avail (i.e. focus on one particular aspect). Then they disband the taskforce and release witness sightings. The remaining homicide detectives are under-resourced to deal with the influx of public information. Why wouldn't a percentage of that taskforce have focused on the witness sightings from early on?

The reason that case hasn't gone to the coroner is because they still have potentially valid information to work through, which IMO should have been done while the taskforce existed.

It's potentially going to be similiar with this one. Open finding by the Coroner, police resources scaled back, but still 730 POI's (plus any new ones) to work through.

 

[Wallace52]

Never heard of that before. Do you have any reference or link?

It was always my understanding that William was living with his real parents, and they absconded with him instead of handing him over to DOCS/FACS.

That’s correct. His bio parents did not know actually where the FGM house was located.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

None of us are experts and are not privy to all the information. So we observe and form opinions with what is publicly available.

It does seem though that what you say has some merit. To me, if you have a task force working on a case, there are enough resources to spread your focus from the beginning. In this case, they seem to have taken turns moving their focus from one target to the next. Then, as you say, they try to make it fit.

I've read they've only had 1 analyst involved. We heard there have been 1700 POI's of which 730-odd are still relevant. Why haven't more resources been thrown at categorically eliminating as many of those as possible? So what if highly trained detectives have to sit and sift through CCTV, toll/speed gantries, or whatever else to eliminate vehicles and persons of interest. To leave that job to one person because "that's her job" is ridiculous.

I've always had a strong interest in the Bung Siriboon case (obviously Vicpol). The Puma taskforce (12 detectives) worked their way through a list of 200ish known sex offenders to no avail (i.e. focus on one particular aspect). Then they disband the taskforce and release witness sightings. The remaining homicide detectives are under-resourced to deal with the influx of public information. Why wouldn't a percentage of that taskforce have focused on the witness sightings from early on?

The reason that case hasn't gone to the coroner is because they still have potentially valid information to work through, which IMO should have been done while the taskforce existed.

It's potentially going to be similiar with this one. Open finding by the Coroner, police resources scaled back, but still 730 POI's (plus any new ones) to work through.

Agreed. Narrowing focus via profiling, lie detector tests which done properly are 98% accurate, and witness statement analysis an accurate known science. With 97% perpetrated known to child and 98% accuracy of lie detector tests just adopt all three at outset to cross check to profile first before eliminating FPs because they didn't self incriminate themselves on listening devices. Had that been done in first week this case would be resolved

 

[truecrimepath]

None of us are experts and are not privy to all the information. So we observe and form opinions with what is publicly available.

It does seem though that what you say has some merit. To me, if you have a task force working on a case, there are enough resources to spread your focus from the beginning. In this case, they seem to have taken turns moving their focus from one target to the next. Then, as you say, they try to make it fit.

I've read they've only had 1 analyst involved. We heard there have been 1700 POI's of which 730-odd are still relevant. Why haven't more resources been thrown at categorically eliminating as many of those as possible? So what if highly trained detectives have to sit and sift through CCTV, toll/speed gantries, or whatever else to eliminate vehicles and persons of interest. To leave that job to one person because "that's her job" is ridiculous.

I've always had a strong interest in the Bung Siriboon case (obviously Vicpol). The Puma taskforce (12 detectives) worked their way through a list of 200ish known sex offenders to no avail (i.e. focus on one particular aspect). Then they disband the taskforce and release witness sightings. The remaining homicide detectives are under-resourced to deal with the influx of public information. Why wouldn't a percentage of that taskforce have focused on the witness sightings from early on?

The reason that case hasn't gone to the coroner is because they still have potentially valid information to work through, which IMO should have been done while the taskforce existed.

It's potentially going to be similiar with this one. Open finding by the Coroner, police resources scaled back, but still 730 POI's (plus any new ones) to work through.

I think they should forget the 730 poi. It will just create another target for which there is no evidence. If they do target one, we will see the same shitty approach in which they try and intimidate someone.

In September 2019. The police were asked when the photos were taken. They could not answer. They had 5 years to examine closely the only verifiable piece of evidence in this case. Have they even looked at them even now? Establish he was there at 9.37 first.

 

[31550]

Agree with AB and TCP and ES that the police methodology has always seemed back-to-front:
Come up with a theory and then try to fit the available evidence to it (confirmation bias), ignoring the pieces that don't fit (tunnel vision).
E.g.
1. Bios took him. Evidence: They'd previously hidden him (confirmation bias). Ignored evidence: No knowledge of his whereabouts, no means to travel there, and cast-iron alibis.
2. Spedding. Evidence: Phone calls, previous CSO allegations (confirmation bias). Ignored evidence: cast-iron alibi.
3. Savage. Evidence: Behaved strangely, talked to himself (confirmation bias). Ignored evidence: No actual means or opportunity to abduct William and hide him without being seen. Reasonable alibi.
4. Wandered off and got lost. Evidence: None really, just an assumption. Ignored evidence: Not a wanderer, gone only 5 minutes, only 3YO, no scent off the property, extensive ground search found no trace.
5. Accident and cover-up. Evidence: Deleted text messages. FM hand injury. FM drive to BCR doesn't fit timeline. Situational analysis - high balcony? (confirmation bias and assumptions).

The 'real' answer needs to explain ALL the pieces of evidence. Cannot just selectively ignore those that don't fit.

 

[31550]

Unless they left by the dirt road that led into the state forest.
Which could be easily done in a 4WD

Well yes, and I think in favourable weather conditions the dirt road would be accessible by regular 2WD vehicles (including FGM's Mazda) to some extent at least. It is a '4WD track' and not a gated Fire Access Road, right?
It's conceivable at least that FM drove the Mazda up the bush track some distance and returned, and the trip to BCR is a fabrication. Nobody witnessed where she went.

 

[Awakening]

Hey coppers, would you mind telling us what you have and haven’t done?

 

[Awakening]

What do you think Kurve ?

A typo or a hint?

• Inquest will examine if foster grandmother disposed of his body

Tragic theory on what happened to William Tyrrell to be examined

The toddler - who was last seen wearing a Spider-Man costume - went missing while playing on the verandah at his foster grandmother's home in Kendall, on the NSW mid-north coast.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[truecrimepath]

What do you think Kurve ?

A typo or a hint?

• Inquest will examine if foster grandmother disposed of his body

Tragic theory on what happened to William Tyrrell to be examined

The toddler - who was last seen wearing a Spider-Man costume - went missing while playing on the verandah at his foster grandmother's home in Kendall, on the NSW mid-north coast.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Typo

 

[Kurve]

What do you think Kurve ?

A typo or a hint?

• Inquest will examine if foster grandmother disposed of his body

Tragic theory on what happened to William Tyrrell to be examined

The toddler - who was last seen wearing a Spider-Man costume - went missing while playing on the verandah at his foster grandmother's home in Kendall, on the NSW mid-north coast.

www.dailymail.co.uk

It looks like a typo but it might not be.

The possibility of the FGMs involvement might become part of the FMs defence if she's ever charged.

 

[Awakening]

It looks like a typo but it might not be.

The possibility of the FGMs involvement might become part of the FMs defence if she's ever charged.

Journalist is Miklos Bolza For Aap

 

[LRitz]

What do you think Kurve ?

A typo or a hint?

• Inquest will examine if foster grandmother disposed of his body

Tragic theory on what happened to William Tyrrell to be examined

The toddler - who was last seen wearing a Spider-Man costume - went missing while playing on the verandah at his foster grandmother's home in Kendall, on the NSW mid-north coast.

www.dailymail.co.uk

Must be a typo

But again they report ...."went missing while playing on the verandah at his foster grandmother's home in...."
You would think by this point the reports would be that this is alleged by the FM and FGM. And allegedly wearing spiderman suit. And allegedly everyone was happy.

 

[Underarrest_]

Finally, the secret William Tyrrell tapes emerge

The secret grilling of William Tyrrell 's foster mother about the toddler's disappearance and her possible cover up and dumping of his body will be played in open court for the first time.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[Awakening]

Finally, the secret William Tyrrell tapes emerge

The secret grilling of William Tyrrell 's foster mother about the toddler's disappearance and her possible cover up and dumping of his body will be played in open court for the first time.

www.dailymail.co.uk

So maybe not a typo if this was what was asked at the crime commission?

“SD was then asked: 'Did you decide to take care of the situation that was beyond remedy?' and 'did you decide to take care of the situation and hide his body rather than let your (SD's) mother take .. responsibility'.”

 

[stormbird]

Depending on what time Peter was there and didn’t see the Fgm car - if the times match it suggests to me that the FM wasn’t there at that time

Good point. If there was anything incriminating in what he said, maybe that part couldn't be reported?

 

[stormbird]

IMO the point of the truck drivers evidence is relevant -
1. There were unknow cars driving in the area when WT went missing.
2. The truck driver saw an unknow car in the area where WT went missing and the driver was acting suspiciously.
This points to the fact that there were unknown cars/people in the area that were not noticed by the neighbors and could have been involved in WT's disappearance.

Just my opinion, I think the two vehicles that Peter the truck driver saw in Batar Creek Road (grey ute, dark BMW) would potentially be interesting for the times they were there and whatever the occupants saw, but Peter said they didn't come out of Benaroon Drive. Unless he had more information about them, I think there's not really any reason to think they were anything other than passersby.

And his report of the woman in the black Camry had her driving from Kew to Kendall and parking at the Op Shop, which is not very close to where William went missing. Unless Peter later spotted her on Batar Creek Rd, Benaroon Dr, or Cobb & Co Rd, I think it's strange she was even mentioned.

 

[stormbird]

Well yes, and I think in favourable weather conditions the dirt road would be accessible by regular 2WD vehicles (including FGM's Mazda) to some extent at least. It is a '4WD track' and not a gated Fire Access Road, right?
It's conceivable at least that FM drove the Mazda up the bush track some distance and returned, and the trip to BCR is a fabrication. Nobody witnessed where she went.

From what I've read the fire trail was not accessible for 2WD vehicles - I think there were ruts in the track soon after the end of the bitumen near Nos. 51 and 52. But if police are saying FM drove after FF got home, her 4WD might have been available.

We haven't even been told if FM had ever been along that fire trail, though. Hypothetically, if she knew that route she probably wouldn't have attempted it except in a 4WD (so, after FF got home). But if she hadn't been that way before, she might have tried in FGM's car at any time but then had to turn around somewhere near Nos. 51 and 52 (potentially being heard by the Crabbs on their back deck as a car doing a U-turn on gravel). My speculation only, and so far there seems to be no evidence the fosters were even involved, IMO.

 

[zedx]

But the car was noticed and was not on Benaroon drive.

How do we know they weren't near or on Benaroon DR? We dont. FM driving on Benaroon DR was not noticed? The point is, no one else noticed these four cars. So if these cars weren't seen or heard by anyone else there is the likely hood that there were other cars in the area that were also not noticed. Which IMO infers abduction by an unknown person could be a real possibility.

 

[31550]

Just my opinion, I think the two vehicles that Peter the truck driver saw in Batar Creek Road (grey ute, dark BMW) would potentially be interesting for the times they were there and whatever the occupants saw, but Peter said they didn't come out of Benaroon Drive. Unless he had more information about them, I think there's not really any reason to think they were anything other than passersby.

And his report of the woman in the black Camry had her driving from Kew to Kendall and parking at the Op Shop, which is not very close to where William went missing. Unless he later spotted her on Batar Creek Rd, Benaroon Dr, or Cobb & Co Rd, I think it's strange she was even mentioned.

Unless Peter's testimony can be corroborated by another witness - the person he picked the excavator up from, or the driver(s) of any of the cars he witnessed, or perhaps his mobile phone records, then I can't see any of it being given much weight (apologies to the 'large blonde woman' - no pun intended). At this stage it's no more meaningful or relevant than Ron Chapman's testimony. We need substantiating evidence that Peter was where he said he was, when he said he was (whenever that was)!

 

[Underarrest_]

How do we know they weren't near or on Benaroon DR? We dont. FM driving on Benaroon DR was not noticed? The point is, no one else noticed these four cars. So if these cars weren't seen or heard by anyone else there is the likely hood that there were other cars in the area that were also not noticed. Which IMO infers abduction by an unknown person could be a real possibility.

I wonder if police have been able to ID the blonde woman. A lot of op shops have security cameras or maybe there was others in the vicinity.
I’m thinking the truckies evidence has some relevance.

 

[zedx]

And for William to leave the property he had to be in a car which drove all the way up and down Benaroon Drive. Which cars have been identified which did that?

The point is if these cars were not noticed by anyone there is the chance there were other cars in the area that were also not noticed. No one noticed FM's drive on Benaroon DR.

 

[zedx]

Unless Peter's testimony can be corroborated by another witness - the person he picked the excavator up from, or the driver(s) of any of the cars he witnessed, or perhaps his mobile phone records, then I can't see any of it being given much weight (apologies to the 'large blonde woman' - no pun intended). At this stage it's no more meaningful or relevant than Ron Chapman's testimony. We need substantiating evidence that Peter was where he said he was, when he said he was (whenever that was)!

I would like to assume that that these things were checked before he was brough in as a witness, which would have been very easy to confirm.