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

 

[alwaysintrigued]

And the coroner declined to call Lonergan even though NSWPOL wanted to put him up. Wouldn't Lonergan be the best person to answer what the police believe is the timeline and why?
Can't you see why I would think the coroner is perhaps not trying hard enough to get this answered?

I think that the Coroner is a very smart woman, I trust she knows what she is doing & has the experience.

She's not stupid & this isn't her first rodeo, so to speak.

You don't know what the Coroner & Mr Craddock knows & neither do I.

I doubt the FM will be re-called IMO, if the NSW CC could not get answers & they tried their best IMO ( and we know that there were no charges laid against the FM in relation to William after 2 days of hearings - seeing as she was told that nothing she says could be held against her, providing she told the truth - that she could not be prosecuted unless she gave false evidence ) than I don't see how putting her back on the witness stand will achieve anything different.

 

[Wallace52]

I think that the Coroner is a very smart woman, I trust she knows what she is doing & has the experience.

She's not stupid & this isn't her first rodeo, so to speak.

You don't know what the Coroner & Mr Craddock knows & neither do I.

If the Deputy Coroner and her Counsel Assisting know more than we do, then they should make it public so we all can know and so as a society we can learn from this death and make sure it doesn’t happen again.

There shouldn’t really be any secrets at an inquest.

IMO

 

[31550]

I think that the Coroner is a very smart woman, I trust she knows what she is doing & has the experience.

She's not stupid & this isn't her first rodeo, so to speak.

You don't know what the Coroner & Mr Craddock knows & neither do I.

I doubt the FM will be re-called IMO, if the NSW CC could not get answers & they tried their best IMO ( and we know that there were no charges laid against the FM in relation to William after 2 days of hearings - seeing as she was told that nothing she says could be held against her, providing she told the truth - that she could not be prosecuted unless she gave false evidence ) than I don't see how putting her back on the witness stand will achieve anything different.

What would be the logic behind declining to call Lonergan? You seem to know the DC better than I do and as you pointed out I "obviously have no idea how Coronial Inquests are conducted" so I am deferring to your expertise. Why would the DC not want to establish a firm timeline before calling random truck drivers? Why would the DC sit through 4 hours of video evidence if it did not help establish the timeline? Why would the DC even admit the police theory into evidence if it didn't contain a (theoretical) timeline? And if the police brief is so incomplete as to not include a detailed timeline then why has Craddock not sought to establish one, or called on Lonergan to provide it?

 

[31550]

The Coroner may not have to ask for it. There may be a statement from someone who saw her driving. Maybe the man on the lawnmower, maybe the right truck driver, maybe somebody else that we haven't heard about.

Why not just get to the point then? We just wasted a week IMO. Got nowhere.

 

[alwaysintrigued]

If the Deputy Coroner and her Counsel Assisting know more than we do, then they should make it public so we all can know and so as a society we can learn from this death and make sure it doesn’t happen again.

There shouldn’t really be any secrets at an inquest.

IMO

That's what the findings are for. Do you really expect every single moment of a long running inquest to be publicised??

It's why I make the effort & go myself as so much is not reported on.

 

[Wallace52]

That's what the findings are for. Do you really expect every single moment of a long running inquest to be publicised??

It's why I make the effort & go myself as so much is not reported on.

Maybe they should live stream it, like Judge Lee did with the Lehermann defo case - as there was so much public interest in the case and he believed in the principals of open justice.

 

[31550]

That's what the findings are for. Do you really expect every single moment of a long running inquest to be publicised??

It's why I make the effort & go myself as so much is not reported on.

I would expect those proceedings which NEED to be held privately to be held privately and EVERYTHING ELSE to be in the public domain. She reports to the DCJ, so she is ultimately accountable to elected representatives of the people of NSW. They pay her wages.
She has powers to obtain information necessary for her to do her job.
If it's not available, then it's not available. But at least ask the questions.
Craddock made a song and dance about 9:37 and that is great. Why is there not the same song and dance about 10:30 to 10:57?
William was alive and well at 9:37. Then nowhere to be seen by 10:30. If as the police allege FM moved him isn't it far more likely to have been achieved before 10:30 than after 10:30 when FM was in plain sight of all the neighbours? Pretty simple deductive reasoning.

 

[Underarrest_]

My understanding is that in 2019 the inquest had come to an end and the Coroner was going to hand down her findings in coming months.
The police then told the Coroner that they have a new theory so the Coroner postponed her findings to give the police the opportunity to follow up on this. (The Coroner might have even worked with police during this process.)
The Coroner would be aware of what the police findings/evidence/theory is.
The inquest now is to test that theory (so to speak.)
Then the Coroner will make her findings.
(Happy for someone to correct me if I’m wrong.)

 

[31550]

My understanding is that in 2019 the inquest had come to an end and the Coroner was going to hand down her findings in coming months.
The police then told the Coroner that they have a new theory so the Coroner postponed her findings to give the police the opportunity to follow up on this. The Coroner might have even worked with police during this process.)
The Coroner would be aware of what the police findings/evidence/theory is.
The inquest now is to test that theory (so to speak.)
Then the Coroner will make her findings.
(Happy for someone to correct me if I’m wrong.)

That is what appears to have happened but IMO this is the tail wagging the dog. The coroner should be independent of the police.

 

[Kurve]

That is what appears to have happened but IMO this is the tail wagging the dog. The coroner should be independent of the police.

The Coroner can direct the police but iirc the Commissioner said they were working with the Coroner. I don't think she'd have been compelled to suspend the inquiry while a fresh investigation was launched unless whatever this new information was that they had, was relevant and of import. Whatever that was.

 

[passball]

I think that the Coroner is a very smart woman, I trust she knows what she is doing & has the experience.

She's not stupid & this isn't her first rodeo, so to speak.

You don't know what the Coroner & Mr Craddock knows & neither do I.

I doubt the FM will be re-called IMO, if the NSW CC could not get answers & they tried their best IMO ( and we know that there were no charges laid against the FM in relation to William after 2 days of hearings - seeing as she was told that nothing she says could be held against her, providing she told the truth - that she could not be prosecuted unless she gave false evidence ) than I don't see how putting her back on the witness stand will achieve anything different.

She will never tell the truth. Reputation and shame will stop her, no remorse IMO

 

[alwaysintrigued]

Maybe they should live stream it, like Judge Lee did with the Lehermann defo case - as there was so much public interest in the case and he believed in the principals of open justice.

I wish they did. Some Coronial inquests have been live streamed.

Coroners Court of New South Wales

Coroners investigate deaths to determine the identity of the deceased, the date, place, manner and cause of death, and investigate the cause and origin of fires and explosions. By using this site you agree to be bound by the following terms and conditions. The Court Security Act 2005...

www.youtube.com

 

[alwaysintrigued]

I would expect those proceedings which NEED to be held privately to be held privately and EVERYTHING ELSE to be in the public domain. She reports to the DCJ, so she is ultimately accountable to elected representatives of the people of NSW. They pay her wages.
She has powers to obtain information necessary for her to do her job.
If it's not available, then it's not available. But at least ask the questions.
Craddock made a song and dance about 9:37 and that is great. Why is there not the same song and dance about 10:30 to 10:57?
William was alive and well at 9:37. Then nowhere to be seen by 10:30. If as the police allege FM moved him isn't it far more likely to have been achieved before 10:30 than after 10:30 when FM was in plain sight of all the neighbours? Pretty simple deductive reasoning.

You have no idea of what questions she has asked. Believe me there was a "song and dance" made about 10:37 to 10:57, actually from 09:37 onwards .

 

[Angry Red Bull]

What would be the logic behind declining to call Lonergan? You seem to know the DC better than I do and as you pointed out I "obviously have no idea how Coronial Inquests are conducted" so I am deferring to your expertise. Why would the DC not want to establish a firm timeline before calling random truck drivers? Why would the DC sit through 4 hours of video evidence if it did not help establish the timeline? Why would the DC even admit the police theory into evidence if it didn't contain a (theoretical) timeline? And if the police brief is so incomplete as to not include a detailed timeline then why has Craddock not sought to establish one, or called on Lonergan to provide it?

The inquest is to hear and see the evidence. It's not supposed to hear someone's narration of the theory surrounding the evidence. That is prejudicial. That's why he wasn't called..

 

[Angry Red Bull]

You have no idea of what questions she has asked. Believe me there was a "song and dance" made about 10:37 to 10:57, actually from 09:37 onwards .

Then elaborate rather than criticise

 

[alwaysintrigued]

The Coroner can direct the police but iirc the Commissioner said they were working with the Coroner. I don't think she'd have been compelled to suspend the inquiry while a fresh investigation was launched unless whatever this new information was that they had, was relevant and of import. Whatever that was.

No, the Commissioner was working with the police , nothing to do with the Coroner or any of the Coroners staff.

Craddock : " Here it would seem NSWPF approached the Crime Commission with a request that it give consideration of an investigation of the FM, that's not something that was done by the Coroner or anyone assisting the Coroner"

 

[Kurve]

The inquest is to hear and see the evidence. It's not supposed to hear someone's narration of the theory surrounding the evidence. That is prejudicial. That's why he wasn't called..

More I'd think is the Coroner's made a point the cops opinion has no relevance to her findings. Crossing the t's and dotting the i's.

 

[Kurve]

No, the Commissioner was working with the police , nothing to do with the Coroner or any of the Coroners staff.

Craddock : " Here it would seem NSWPF approached the Crime Commission with a request that it give consideration of an investigation of the FM, that's not something that was done by the Coroner or anyone assisting the Coroner"

I realise that's what is said now but I'm referring to the cops statement when the fresh dig in Kendall was started. It was through the flurry of pressers.

 

[Kurve]

No, the Commissioner was working with the police , nothing to do with the Coroner or any of the Coroners staff.

Craddock : " Here it would seem NSWPF approached the Crime Commission with a request that it give consideration of an investigation of the FM, that's not something that was done by the Coroner or anyone assisting the Coroner"

The Coroner also around the same time, subpoenaed all notes, audio recordings and materials of a Channel 10 journalist who produced the Where's William Tyrrell podcast.

It may have been the police who approached the Crime Commission with a request for an investigation but that doesn't preclude the Coroner working with the cops and/or under her direction in other elements of the investigation.

 

[Kurve]

Another mention here:

Detective Chief Superintendent Darren Bennett said the renewed search would take two to three weeks.

'This activity is in response to evidence we've obtained in the course of the investigation, it's not speculative in any way,' he said.

'We are acting on behalf of the Coroner and in conjunction with the coronial orders, she will be kept updated with regard to our progress.

'We're very hopeful that we can bring this matter to some form of conclusion.'

Coroner demands Channel Ten hand over all William Tyrrell info

The Coroner's Court has subpoenaed all notes, audio recordings and materials of journalist Lia Harris, as the investigation into William Tyrell's disappearance takes a dramatic turn.

www.dailymail.co.uk

 

[31550]

The inquest is to hear and see the evidence. It's not supposed to hear someone's narration of the theory surrounding the evidence. That is prejudicial. That's why he wasn't called..

Yes but if the coroner doesn't accept the police theory, why not cross examine the police and disprove it.
Reject one narrative if you feel it is unworthy, but unless you have a better alternative more viable narrative, there is no basis for rejecting what is put before you.
There is evidence which proves things cannot have happened the way police currently theorise. What is the alternative, plausible theory.
E.g. Couldn't have made the drive after 10:30
Therefore must have made the drive before 10.30. Or no drive at all. Or someone else made the drive.

 

[31550]

You have no idea of what questions she has asked. Believe me there was a "song and dance" made about 10:37 to 10:57, actually from 09:37 onwards .

Yes you keep reminding me I have no idea.
Implication is that you do.
So what was the decision reached by this song and dance, or was it just the coroner wasting more time?

 

[Kurve]

Please take the time to read this on posting copyright material. You may copy and paste a couple of paragraphs from any verified news source including the link, not the entire article. Paraphrasing is fine.

Mod. Notice - Posting Newspaper Articles - Please Read re Copyright

Copyright Material "Reminder on Terms of Use regarding posting news articles and other third party content" :- Admin Announcement - Please Read re Copyright: Posting Newspaper Articles Copyright Material As publishers of your posts, please be aware that you could be held liable should you...

www.bigfooty.com

 

[Kurve]

I doubt the FM will be re-called IMO, if the NSW CC could not get answers & they tried their best IMO ( and we know that there were no charges laid against the FM in relation to William after 2 days of hearings - seeing as she was told that nothing she says could be held against her, providing she told the truth - that she could not be prosecuted unless she gave false evidence ) than I don't see how putting her back on the witness stand will achieve anything different.

Yes and the only charge they could raise from that was lying or not telling the truth, for which she was acquitted. The only option they had for a charge.

Perhaps putting her back on the stand in the Coroners court will be to examine evidence they pulled from her through the Crime Commission hearings.

 

[alwaysintrigued]

Yes you keep reminding me I have no idea.
Implication is that you do.
So what was the decision reached by this song and dance, or was it just the coroner wasting more time?

Well for starters they did a reenactment of her drive, but I don't recall the date.

*
.