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

 

[LRitz]

Yes, CCTV has him passing the tennis club about 8:40am.

So you don't know of the FGM was at the inquest or what time the FF left after all these years?

Is it your view that if no one saw anything it didn't happen?

And yes I do believe those thing could have happened in that time frame as all activities were of a short duration IMO

Yes. CCTV is certain.

To explain my comment Wallace52, it was reply to alwaysintrigued who asked me in post 6358 "So you don't know of the FGM was at the inquest or what time the FF left after all these years?"

I was pointing out that there were differences in statements of time FF left the house. The FF and FM, are wrong if they say he left at or about 9:00. Maybe FF has early signs of dementia.

I think the FF left the house at least before the time to drive to the tennis club. So ~ 8:35 to 8:40 around that time. But he could have left earlier. So the time FF left the house is possible between early 7:30 am to 8:40 am. He could not have left at 9:00 unless he doubled back after going past the tennis club.

If alwaysintrigued is implying that they know for certain what time FF left the house can they let me know.

 

[jason_recliner]

A burner phone is just a simple prepaid. Are you trying to imply anybody with a burner phone is a criminal?

"Burner phone" has a specific meaning - it's a phone to use and then dispose of. There are millions of prepaid phones that aren't "burner phones". And the fact they are disposable and used (not solely) by criminals definitely brings with it connotations associated with nefarious purposes.

 

[31550]

A burner phone is just a simple prepaid. Are you trying to imply anybody with a burner phone is a criminal?

I thought a burner phone meant a phone which was not registered in the owner/user's real name, and hence could not be traced? (Pretty difficult to do in this country). Lots of us have 'second' phones or SIMS - perfectly legal. A true burner is illegal.

 

[31550]

It was talked about for 4 hours at the inquest last week with the NSW CC video being played to the Coroner.

And yet there is no definite timeline or location for this drive, as there is e.g. for the Roar photograph?
Shouldn't the coroner have a position on where and when the drive was, at least, if not why?
It's foolish to rely on the FM telling us where and when and why she took the drive. It needs forensic evidence - phone pings etc or at least independent witnesses.

 

[Kurve]

"Burner phone" has a specific meaning - it's a phone to use and then dispose of. There are millions of prepaid phones that aren't "burner phones". And the fact they are disposable and used (not solely) by criminals definitely brings with it connotations associated with nefarious purposes.

To you maybe they're associated with nefarious purposes.

 

[31550]

To you maybe they're associated with nefarious purposes.

It's a semantic issue. Such phones are perfectly legal in Australia however to use them you need an active SIM. And to get a SIM you need to provide legal ID. So truly anonymous phone use is not legal in Australia. IMO.

 

[Kurve]

That's very unusual - not sure why they'd call their phones "burners" unless thy intended to dispose of them after use (or maybe they're trying to sound cool because they heard it on Breaking Bad). And I'm going out to see some live jazz tonight!

They're just cheap, basic phones.

A burner phone, or burner, is an inexpensive mobile phone designed for temporary, sometimes anonymous, use, after which it may be discarded. Burners are purchased with prepaid minutes and without a formal contract with a communications provider.

 

[LRitz]

With a 9 minute or 13 minute adjustment depending on which version you believe. However FM statement says he was in the house when she called Spedding, which has been shown to be 9.03am so that's yet another discrepancy.

Agree. I think it is easy to be out by few minutes or not know the accurate time FF left . But it is harder to get the whole picture wrong of making the call while FF is there. And to say FF is running late. So someone must have been aware of the time to judge he was late. But it is possible to make mistake. Maybe FF has the so called alleged dementia and it runs in the family.

Again what I think is an issue is any problems of statement before 9:30. This should have been clear sailing if nothing happened until after 9:30.

Also, as previously discussed, what was the pressure to ring Spedding first thing on Friday morning. He couldn't get there any quicker without the spare part. And then why omit the phone call from the statement.

 

[alwaysintrigued]

And yet there is no definite timeline or location for this drive, as there is e.g. for the Roar photograph?
Shouldn't the coroner have a position on where and when the drive was, at least, if not why?
It's foolish to rely on the FM telling us where and when and why she took the drive. It needs forensic evidence - phone pings etc or at least independent witnesses.

I dare say that the coroner is going to have to decide that for herself, after her hearing all the evidence. That's what they do.

Same as being missing for "5 minutes" when Mr Craddock said " Perhaps it was longer, a matter for the Coroner to determine"

 

[Kurve]

It's a semantic issue. Such phones are perfectly legal in Australia however to use them you need an active SIM. And to get a SIM you need to provide legal ID. So truly anonymous phone use is not legal in Australia. IMO.

The cops found a SIM card that was registered to one of the FFs companies, or one he worked for?

 

[LRitz]

A lot of people have burner phones for varying reasons,......r because they're having an affair.

Kurve ?

 

[31550]

The cops found a SIM card that was registered to one of the FFs companies, or one he worked for?

True but wasn't that the one which had never been used?

 

[alwaysintrigued]

The FF left about 08:55 - 09:00.

Mostly the inquest has just said around 9am

 

[InTheBleachers]

She took the drive before looking for him, and before telling anybody he was missing.

That's not what the police say.


"Police assert that in that frame of mind she placed William in her mother's car and after alerting [a neighbour] to William's disappearance, drove the mother's car down to Batar Creek Road and placed William's body somewhere in undergrowth and then returned [home] to 48 Benaroon Drive and called the police via triple-0."

William Tyrrell inquest resumes with new details of police theory about involvement of former foster mother

Any evidence police have gathered against William Tyrrell's foster mother will finally be presented to a coroner as the inquest into the toddler's disappearance resumes this week.

www.abc.net.au

 

[Angry Red Bull]

The FF left about 08:55 - 09:00.

Mostly the inquest has just said around 9am

He was caught on CCTV at 8.40 so had left earlier

 

[31550]

Also, as previously discussed, what was the pressure to ring Spedding first thing on Friday morning. He couldn't get there any quicker without the spare part. And then why omit the phone call from the statement.

I don't have any problem accepting this part of FM testimony. She decided she wanted to do some washing. FGM told her the washing machine was broken so she couldn't and would have to wait for Spedding to fix it in his own time as that was the way they did things. FM being her entitled self thought this was not good enough - I want the machine NOW - Spedding can drop whatever he is doing and come and fix the machine NOW. Lucky for Spedding he missed her call and didn't have to deal with her, except that he got thrown under the bus and his life completely ruined by missing that call!

 

[31550]

That's not what the police say.


"Police assert that in that frame of mind she placed William in her mother's car and after alerting [a neighbour] to William's disappearance, drove the mother's car down to Batar Creek Road and placed William's body somewhere in undergrowth and then returned [home] to 48 Benaroon Drive and called the police via triple-0."

William Tyrrell inquest resumes with new details of police theory about involvement of former foster mother

Any evidence police have gathered against William Tyrrell's foster mother will finally be presented to a coroner as the inquest into the toddler's disappearance resumes this week.

www.abc.net.au

As I said I don't particularly care what the police say. Their theory makes no sense. And if it makes no sense it probably isn't true. If William suffered a true accident there is absolutely no need to cover it up. You ring 000. You ring your husband. You don't try and hide anything.

 

[LRitz]

So you don't know of the FGM was at the inquest or what time the FF left after all these years?

Is it your view that if no one saw anything it didn't happen?

And yes I do believe those thing could have happened in that time frame as all activities were of a short duration IMO

LRitz, re: "...it is possible William was run over by the postie."

From memory, that's the second time you've suggested that. Have you seen that allegation by anybody in the investigation, or what are you referring to?

At the time of the Local Court hearing for Gary Jubelin's charges it was reported that Det Sgt Beacroft had been asked (I don't know when) about Det Sgt Lambert's view about the postie. She was reported to think it "far-fetched", but I've never seen an explanation for what his view actually was.

The "I Catch Killers" book by Jubelin and Box says the postie's early delivery time that day (8:45am) was verified by CCTV cameras around Kendall. If that's correct, I think it's likely the postie can't have run over William, MOO.

Sorry Stormbird, I think the meaning was lost in the chain of posts. I was replying to alwaysintrigued, that if something (anything ) was not seen then it did not happen. I am open to possibilities but don't want to be forced into believing something just because it is repeated over and over, or dismissing another possibility.

The Postie comment was meant in a hyperbole or sarcasm. I understand in print sarcasm does not always go down well and can easily be misinterpreted. So again sorry and try not to confuse in the future. I think it is highly unlikely that the postie or any other car accidentally injured William and then decided to hide the body and not get help.
I think it is possible that the bike ride did not happen. But agree that it is possible it did.
I think the FGM did not have dementia.IMO
I did not read Jubelin's book. Fact, certain.

 

[InTheBleachers]

As I said I don't particularly care what the police say. Their theory makes no sense. And if it makes no sense it probably isn't true. If William suffered a true accident there is absolutely no need to cover it up. You ring 000. You ring your husband. You don't try and hide anything.

You keep saying that the drive was before anyone knew that WT was missing. You don't know that. The police obviously think it was after. They could have a reason for that.

 

[passball]

Did Paul Savage stop in and visit with a lady who was living in a caravan during his walk that day?
If so, was the caravan near the fire trail?

 

[alwaysintrigued]

He was caught on CCTV at 8.40 so had left earlier

Is that the corrected time of the CCTV? I've also seen 08:49 mentioned. I don't believe the CCTV of the time it caught the FF driving past has been said at the inquest.

 

[Underarrest_]

I don't have any problem accepting this part of FM testimony. She decided she wanted to do some washing. FGM told her the washing machine was broken so she couldn't and would have to wait for Spedding to fix it in his own time as that was the way they did things. FM being her entitled self thought this was not good enough - I want the machine NOW - Spedding can drop whatever he is doing and come and fix the machine NOW. Lucky for Spedding he missed her call and didn't have to deal with her, except that he got thrown under the bus and his life completely ruined by missing that call!

Maybe there was another reason.
FF had just arrived. I personally wouldn’t have too much washing the first day of holidays or in three days that I couldn’t take back home with me if I was too slack to hand wash.

 

[31550]

You keep saying that the drive was before anyone knew that WT was missing. You don't know that. The police obviously think it was after. They could have a reason for that.

This is based on analysis of the proven timeline. Overlaid with impartial eyewitness accounts, particularly Anne Maree Sharpley. Concentrating on the events between 10.35 when the FF returned home and 10:57 when the 000 call was made it is IMO physically impossible to make that drive as described AND be where Anne Maree says FM was.

I am not privy to phone data or geolocation data which the police may or may not have. They may have forensic data which supports their theory and proves me wrong.

But so far they have not presented it.

Nor has the coroner asked for it.

Which is surprising and disappointing.

 

[LRitz]

The FF left about 08:55 - 09:00.

Mostly the inquest has just said around 9am

But after all these years how does that fit with the tennis club CCTV. He did not leave at 9:00. He must have left at around 8:40 to be at the tennis club (even with the variation of times of the CCTV recording at the club). If he left at 9:00 the CCTV would have shown him there at ~ around 9:05.

Unless he past the tennis club and doubled back by a different route and left again after the FM made the phone call to Spedding.
Don't they think this is important?
Why did FM give false evidence? (Don't say the dementia that runs in the family).
Was he running late? I recall the call was booked for 9:30 so he was not running late and the call started early.
FF walkthrough (as I recall) says he left 9 ish. He is asked did he stop on the way. FF replies: no. So why did it take him 25 to 30 minutes to do a 10 minute trip.

 

[jason_recliner]

But after all these years how does that fit with the tennis club CCTV. He did not leave at 9:00. He must have left at around 8:40 to be at the tennis club (even with the variation of times of the CCTV recording at the club). If he left at 9:00 the CCTV would have shown him there at ~ around 9:05.

Unless he past the tennis club and doubled back by a different route and left again after the FM made the phone call to Spedding.
Don't they think this is important?
Why did FM give false evidence? (Don't say the dementia that runs in the family).
Was he running late? I recall the call was booked for 9:30 so he was not running late and the call started early.
FF walkthrough (as I recall) says he left 9 ish. He is asked did he stop on the way. FF replies: no. So why did it take him 25 to 30 minutes to do a 10 minute trip.

How do you know it took him 25-30 minutes, after leaving "around 9", to do a 10 minute trip? How do you know he was driving the whole time?