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

Suppression orders are in force, please use the following to indicate:

FM - Foster Mother
FF - Foster Father
FGM - Foster Grandmother
FD - Foster Daughter
FPs - Foster Parents

Up to you if you wish to refer to them as former fosters but please write it in full, strictly using the above. No deviations.

Other initials posters will use informally but should not are:

BCR - Batar Creek Road
MW - Michelle White
SFR - Strike Force Rosann
AMS - Anne Maree Sharpley
One even reduced bike riding to - BR

 

[31550]

If the podcaster quotes what Craddock said were certainties, I think it's reasonable to assume they are facts.

These are Craddock's certainties, not the podcasters.

Nope.
Still waiting for the proof of the FD saying William went towards the carport, which you have posted twice as fact.

 

[alwaysintrigued]

Yes. He might have left on foot, dogs were unable to track him because of polluted scent trail. You then must resolve if he did how can he possibly not be found when there were hundreds looking? If you say he was taken in the street then by whom? The Stormbird traffic analysis says virtually no one goes there other than residents and a few who have reason. No reason for an opportunistic abductor to be there. Then you have neighbours who didn't see him some of whom were out and about....one mowing lawn as example. So maybe a neighbour....but police searched all houses. So maybe a neighbour who immediately used a car. But background checks.

The choice isn't impossible but increasingly becomes unlikely to the alternative. He was taken in THAT car trip his FM said she made

What's to say he wasn't taken by someone on foot, up the fire trail to someone waiting at the cemetery?

I always found this statement from Paul Savage interesting.

William's abductor may have come from the empty neighbour's house, "put a rag" over the toddler's mouth and taken him through scrub to a waiting car, Mr Savage told police.

Trove of Tyrrell documents show police doubted evidence of key witnesses

Evidence about cars parked outside the home where William Tyrrell vanished and the recollections of a Kendall man who claimed to have seen him in a car being driven away was doubted by investigators.

www.smh.com.au

There was a reason that Gary Jubelin was interested in Paul Savage & IMO I think he saw something & for whatever reason is not saying what.

IMO

 

[alwaysintrigued]

View attachment 2164760

The FD statement about where William went on the day(Wendy Hudson) is in the opposite direction to what has been claimed by the FGM. Does anyone know why.

One says towards the driveway and the other says down below the high verandah.

Was the FD coached to say this? Both can’t be right.

Nope.
Still waiting for the proof of the FD saying William went towards the carport, which you have posted twice as fact.

It was truecrimepth who said that.

 

[31550]

It was truecrimepth who said that.

Oh ok sorry all.

 

[31550]

What's to say he wasn't taken by someone on foot, up the fire trail to someone waiting at the cemetery?

The failure of sniffer dogs to detect his scent applies to all boundaries of the property and adjoining land, including the fire trail I think.

 

[alwaysintrigued]

The failure of sniffer dogs to detect his scent applies to all boundaries of the property and adjoining land, including the fire trail I think.

There would be no trail if he was not on foot ie carried

 

[31550]

There would be no trail if he was not on foot ie carried

Are you sure about that? Scent is left behind by people wearing thick clothing and shoes. Would it be completely blocked by a person carrying another person?
I think there are cases of babies being abducted where dogs were used effectively to track them.
Experts?

 

[LRitz]

Yes agree, her statements were erratic and unreliable. (Motte)

But where they considered "erratic" just because they differed from the alleged version of the FM and FF. Maybe FGM was correct and FF and FM were wrong. (Departure time of FF).
Was she being evasive in some of her answers.
Were some of her answers rehearsed. (FF definitely not at breakfast. list of what they ate for breakfast.)

You can not assume she had dementia. There is evidence against dementia at this time. You can not assume dementia was the cause of her answers. (Bailey)

Motte-and- Bailey again.

Firstly Earls Smother this is not a personal comment or criticism or comment that you are being sneaky or disingenuous. I am simply offering a an reply to your argument.

In case some one was asking what is a motte-and-bailey - it is a medieval type of fort with a motte ( a tower that is easy to defend) surrounded by an area a bailey ( around the tower that is much more difficult to defend).
A motte-and-bailey argument is when two points are put out - one easy to defend (the motte) and one hard to defend (the bailey).
Example:
Bailey: Crystals can be used to treat cancer.
Motte: Sick people need hope.
Combine the two - you agree that people need hope and treatment gives hope so therefore crystals should be used to treat cancer.
When there is agreement with the motte, the motte is somehow linked to the bailey and falsely claim that you have won the point.

Motte: FGM statements are erratic and unreliable. Many would agree
Bailey: FGM has dementia. Disagree, no proof and she is not showing any signs
Combine the two. Agree that FGM is unreliable witness and people with dementia are unreliable. So you must agree that it is likely FGM had dementia.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

What's to say he wasn't taken by someone on foot, up the fire trail to someone waiting at the cemetery?

I always found this statement from Paul Savage interesting.

William's abductor may have come from the empty neighbour's house, "put a rag" over the toddler's mouth and taken him through scrub to a waiting car, Mr Savage told police.

Trove of Tyrrell documents show police doubted evidence of key witnesses

Evidence about cars parked outside the home where William Tyrrell vanished and the recollections of a Kendall man who claimed to have seen him in a car being driven away was doubted by investigators.

www.smh.com.au

There was a reason that Gary Jubelin was interested in Paul Savage & IMO I think he saw something & for whatever reason is not saying what.

IMO

What makes you think he saw something?

His behaviour was odd agreed. He was mildly cognitively impaired.. I watched the GJ interview with him.. My opinion was he was straight as a lace truthful. Straight no answers without elaboration. No hint of deception either. Mmmmmm, I think it is a dead end. There is also the issue he had with Postie harrassing her. The FGM thought he was odd and asked LE to check on him.


What I will say is that IF FM has no involvement then it has to be someone there or a reason to be there. PS fits that mould. But where did he put him? why wasn't W found?

 

[truecrimepath]

Ok so twice now you have claimed FD said he went the other way. Is there any reference for this? I don't think she did.

Stormbird reference to Wendy Hudson statement.

 

[31550]

Stormbird reference to Wendy Hudson statement.

I've read the Wendy Hudson statement. It does NOT say that.

 

[31550]

You might mean Paul Savage here.

I'll never be convinced either the reason Jubelin was forced out/fired was because of an off-books recording.

Oh yes, another slip. That's two for me today. Of course I meant Savage. Apologies. (note the date and time)

PS agree re Jubelin, but that's the official line.

 

[Kurve]

And/or the leaking of the alleged leaking of info this year about the alleged briefs against the FM.

Gary Jubelin's been accused of leaking more than once, it was even alleged in court. Jubelin denies it and is adamant.

Jubelin was accused of leaking to the press that Bill Spedding was to be arrested, so there was a stampede of press there when he was.

We don't know who leaked the information a brief had gone to the DPP or what their motivation was, for all we know it could have been one of the fosters, their lawyers or their PR firm.

 

[truecrimepath]

I've read the Wendy Hudson statement. It does NOT say that.

Have a look back at what Wendy Hudson said about the FD . I read it this morning. Stormbirds post.

 

[31550]

Have a look back at what Wendy Hudson said about the FD . I read it this morning. Stormbirds post.

I don't need to read Stormbirds post. I have Wendy's statement. At no place does it say FD said William went towards the carport.

It doesn't look to me that Stormbird has posted since 12:40am this morning, and that post has nothing to do with Wendy Hudson or the FD.

Stop making random shit up.

 

[LRitz]

Dementia needs to be left on the table though, as Earls Smother said just because she had not been diagnosed with dementia it doesnt mean she didnt have it.

Sorry, I am digging my heels in here on the dementia. You can not win an argument by just repeating it over and over.
I do not know that FGM had any symptoms of dementia. No one said she had dementia. She remembers lots of details about the repair man. So IMO the bit of information we have is supporting NO dementia.

Why do you think it needs to be on the table?
Dementia is more common in older people. But you can't say therefore you are an old person you must have dementia.
A series of one family member means nothing.
It is possible that she had early dementia, but lets not jump to the conclusion that this is a fact.
It is possible that FGM was in collusion with the FF and FM in the disappearance of William. i think that shoud be on the table.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

You might mean Paul Savage here.

I'll never be convinced either the reason Jubelin was forced out/fired was because of an off-books recording.

He was fired because his 2IC white-anted him after an argument about the direction of the case. They then used his illegal listening devices to force what they had already chosen. My opinion

I think GJ was misguided but I never doubt his commitment to the case.

 

[Wallace52]

Gary Jubelin's been accused of leaking more than once, it was even alleged in court. Jubelin denies it and is adamant.

Jubelin was accused of leaking to the press that Bill Spedding was to be arrested, so there was a stampede of press there when he was.

We don't know who leaked the information a brief had gone to the DPP or what their motivation was, for all we know it could have been one of the fosters, their lawyers or their PR firm.

And we will never know as Tiffany Genders is a very principled journalist and I can imagine 9 News are very discrete in protecting their sources.

 

[Wallace52]

He was fired because his 2IC white-anted him after an argument about the direction of the case. They then used his illegal listening devices to force what they had already chosen. My opinion

I think GJ was misguided but I never doubt his commitment to the case.

He is wasn’t fired. He resigned. And it’s not fair to say that about Scott Cook.

*

 

[Wallace52]

If the podcaster quotes what Craddock said were certainties, I think it's reasonable to assume they are facts.

These are Craddock's certainties, not the podcasters.

I just don’t agree with any of this.

Craddock opinion is his opinion. The podcast presenter’s take or angle is his take or angle.

And as he says “you don’t know what you don’t know.”

 

[Angry Red Bull]

He is wasn’t fired. He resigned. And it’s not fair to say that about Scott Cook.

If you have an allegation, take it to ethical standards or leave it alone.

I don't know it was him but there was an acknowledged fist fight between the two because of disagreement about direction of the case..no need to make an allegation .....it is public record that happened..I embellish the rest that he was then white - anted but given they were physically fighting and GJ was then punted you can fill the gaps. I did.

The guy he had an altercation with was a former boxer or martial arts guy. Not cool

Wasn't Cook his boss? Not the guy. It was from his underlings

 

[31550]

He is wasn’t fired. He resigned. And it’s not fair to say that about Scott Cook.

If you have an allegation, take it to ethical standards or leave it alone.

Whatever, we got to this point because someone alleged that the police treatment of FM was not legal, and somehow grounds for her to sue NSWPOL.
The point is that NSWPOL have done nothing illegal or even malicious in their pursuit of the FM - in fact they are doing what they are paid to do, so there is no apparent grounds for FM to sue (although she is legally within her rights to have a ping if she wants to).
The only illegal action remotely related to the case was Jubelin's recording of SAVAGE (not Spedding), for which he was found guilty, albeit in controversial circumstances.

Spedding, on the other hand took civil action successfully because his prosecution was seen as malicious (deliberately harmful).

 

[Wallace52]

Whatever, we got to this point because someone alleged that the police treatment of FM was not legal, and somehow grounds for her to sue NSWPOL.
The point is that NSWPOL have done nothing illegal or even malicious in their pursuit of the FM - in fact they are doing what they are paid to do, so there is no apparent grounds for FM to sue (although she is legally within her rights to have a ping if she wants to).
The only illegal action remotely related to the case was Jubelin's recording of SAVAGE (not Spedding), for which he was found guilty, albeit in controversial circumstances.

Spedding, on the other hand took civil action successfully because his prosecution was seen as malicious (deliberately harmful).

1000%

 

[Earls Smother]

Nope.
Still waiting for the proof of the FD saying William went towards the carport, which you have posted twice as fact.

Nope.
You've got the wrong poster.

 

[31550]

Nope.
You've got the wrong poster.

Yeah I know sorry we already covered that - see above