Current Disappearance of 3yo William Tyrrell * The foster mother has been recommended for charges of pervert the course of justice & interfere with a corpse

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
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
  • Stalking &/or Intimidation on both
  • Dummy bidding real estate fraud *Guilty
TIMELINE

Where's William Tyrrell? - The Ch 10 podcast (under Coroner's subpoena)

Operation Arkstone
 
Last edited:
Lebbo73 said:
Have they framed the FM yet?
Click to expand...

They/we are not yet allowed to publish her name, let alone her face!

Mona Lisa Smile GIF by Witloof Collective
 
Awakening said:
What a sorry state of affairs
Click to expand...
My observations / experience of the foster care system here in Vic (albeit from a few years ago):
  • The 'system' is heavily overloaded, demand for foster care exceeds supply, so the needs of many children/young people go unmet. Compromises are made every day. Corners are cut.
  • Foster carers are the 'bottom of the food chain' - with very few rights. The system is heavily weighted towards the bio parents, as it should be (in most cases). But often, foster carers get frustrated by the system which doesn't recognise their basic needs / rights or acknowledge their contribution.
  • Among foster carers, there is a mix: Some are fantastic, dedicated people who provide great care. Some are not well-equipped to be carers, they either don't have the requisite skills / temperament / motivation etc. Having said that, there are plenty of biological parents who are also not great parents either ...
  • Among the government Dept (DHSS in Vic), and the foster care agencies, there are also a few good, dedicated people. But mostly they are overworked, with too many cases to handle properly, and often they are unskilled, inexperienced social workers with little life experience. They burn out quickly and there is a high turnover of workers. The good ones move on to better-paid jobs outside the system.
  • The systems and processes in place are highly inefficient and often wasteful of valuable resources. Lots of bureaucratic 'red tape', and people being paid to do things which add little or no value. Lots of opportunities to provide more effective services are missed because of the bureaucracy involved.
  • Some of the 'agencies' are merely money-making enterprises in disguise. Some spend a lot of their resources making themselves 'look good', rather than providing necessary services.
 
The magistrate's decision (dated 14 October 2022): Finn, Lincoln, Marina and Blake Hughes [2022] NSWChC 4, NSW Caselaw

The magistrate has the terrible job of deciding which of the awful options for the children's care is likely to do the least damage, IMO; currently there looks to be no good option.

The children's mother, who had first come to the attention of child protection agencies in 1999 in relation to five other children from her first marriage (paragraphs 5 to 8), wants the children restored to her care; their father died in Feb 2019 (para 3). Assessments by the Department of Communities and Justice (DCJ) say that restoration of the children to their mother's care is not a realistic possibility (13, 25). A Children's Court Clinic report "recommended that the children remain in the parental responsibility of the Minister until 18, with a long-term placement in either kinship or foster care" (14).

But since being taken into care in May 2020: "The children have been separated from one another and have suffered ongoing abuse and neglect in care. The children have complex needs. [The oldest child] has been unwilling to have contact with his mother. The short-term placement of the [two youngest] is not secure, the continuing placement of [the two oldest] in the current model of care is not appropriate and the evidence of the DCJ Casework Manager is that there are no long term foster carers available for any or all of the children and there are none ‘on the horizon’ though the search for a long-term placement will be ongoing." (137)

The children's out-of-home care has included:
  • kinship placements, Jun 2020 to Oct 2020: two children with the mother's ex-husband, two children with their adult sister, but both placements broke down (9, 10)
  • an "Interim Care Model" from Oct 2020, designed to be short term: 3-bedroom accommodation with staff rostered to supervise the children day and night (11, 12, 28-39)
  • the two youngest children moved into a foster care placement in June 2021, supposedly short term but in Oct 2022 they were still there (15, 126, 134)
  • the two oldest moved into a foster care placement in Dec 2021, the plan being to move the younger children in too once the older children had settled (16)
  • the foster carers of the two oldest children relinquished care four months later, in Apr 2022, stating they did not feel adequately supported to manage conflict between the children (45)
  • the two oldest children could not return to an Interim Care Model because of lack of availability (21) so they went to an "Alternate Care Arrangement": accommodation in a motel, hotel, serviced apartment, or house staffed by agency providers where the children are supervised by one or sometimes two staff members (20). The Alternate Care Arrangement is "the least preferred model for placements for children" (21). One report said the people providing the children's day-to-day care are 18 year old university students (91).

I've only included references to some paragraphs but the problems with the care arrangements can be found right through the whole document.
 

Log in to remove this ad.

stormbird said:
The magistrate's decision (dated 14 October 2022): Finn, Lincoln, Marina and Blake Hughes [2022] NSWChC 4, NSW Caselaw

The magistrate has the terrible job of deciding which of the awful options for the children's care is likely to do the least damage, IMO; currently there looks to be no good option.
.....
the problems with the care arrangements can be found right through the whole document.
Click to expand...
I wonder to what degree any material deficiencies in the contract, and/or contract management of the Lifestyle Solutions contract with NSW DCJ, could be a major cause/contributor, to issues exposed in this Children's magistrate hearing.

A quick google reveals some 2017 issues that Lifestyle Solutions had with the Victorian Government, and some serious history with both the NSW Ombudsman and NSW FACS.

probonoaustralia.com.au

Victoria Cuts Disability Contracts with NFP Provider Lifestyle Solutions

The Victorian government has cut contracts with NSW-based disability services provider Lifestyle Solutions after an independent review identified a number of concerns in relation to “the delivery of safe and high quality services to people with a disability”.
probonoaustralia.com.au probonoaustralia.com.au
'Victoria Cuts Disability Contracts with NFP Provider Lifestyle Solution
The Victorian government has cut contracts with NSW-based disability services provider Lifestyle Solutions after an independent review identified a number of concerns in relation to “the delivery of safe and high quality services to people with a disability”.'

'Lifestyle Solutions is also being monitored by the NSW Ombudsman.

The Office of the NSW Ombudsman has previously confirmed to Pro Bono News that it was investigating the operations of Lifestyle Solutions after receiving a number of complaints from parents and former staff.

In March, deputy NSW ombudsman Steve Kinmond told the ABC Four Corners report: “We saw enough evidence of significant matters that should not have taken place, to draw a line in the sand and to say we need a broad practice review of the operations of Lifestyle Solutions.”

On Wednesday Kinmond told the ABC: “Arrangements are in place for close tracking and reporting back on progress against the action plan, including regular meetings with the Ombudsman’s office and the Department of Family and Community Services.'

Below is the link to the ABC TV Four Corners 2017 program related to the above VIC and NSW issues (including Lifestyle Solutions), is viewable + transcript and articles and documents related to the issues raised (included a response form Lifestyle Solutions)

www.abc.net.au

Fighting the System

Four Corners is the home of Australian investigative journalism.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
www.abc.net.au

Four Corners: 'Fighting the System' - ABC listen

For parents and carers, the decision to place a child with a disability into care is always a tough one.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
 
www.smh.com.au

Bill Spedding wins malicious prosecution case, awarded $1.48 million

Spedding sued the State of NSW arguing he was charged with historical sex offences to put pressure on him amid the investigation into William Tyrrell’s disappearance.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au

www.abc.net.au

Former Tyrrell suspect says his life has been 'torn apart' as police ordered to pay $1.5m in damages

NSW Police are ordered to pay Bill Spedding almost $1.5 million after he successfully sued for malicious prosecution after historic child sex allegations were unproven.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
 
Last edited:
BFew said:
www.smh.com.au

Bill Spedding wins malicious prosecution case, awarded $1.48 million

Spedding sued the State of NSW arguing he was charged with historical sex offences to put pressure on him amid the investigation into William Tyrrell’s disappearance.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au

www.abc.net.au

Former Tyrrell suspect says his life has been 'torn apart' as police ordered to pay $1.5m in damages

NSW Police are ordered to pay Bill Spedding almost $1.5 million after he successfully sued for malicious prosecution after historic child sex allegations were unproven.
www.abc.net.au www.abc.net.au
Click to expand...

This isn't anywhere near enough to compensate for a ruined life.
 
And today, (assuming there is no successful appeal) it looks like ex-NSW Detective Gary Jubelin's credibility as a detective went even more down the toilet, for the part he played in the William Tyrrell case investigation.

www.thefordhamcompany.com.au

Gary Jubelin - The Fordham Company

Gary Jubelin One of Australia’s more respected and decorated Homicide Detectives, Award- Winning Best-Selling Author, Award winning podcast host and investigative reporter Former Detective Chief Inspector Gary Jubelin is one of the countries most decorated and respected Homicide Detectives and...
www.thefordhamcompany.com.au www.thefordhamcompany.com.au

'One of Australia’s more respected and decorated homicide detectives'​

 
Last edited:
Bill Spedding maliciously prosecuted by NSW Police: Court confirms

"The case highlights the need for the police to have an open mind to all investigations. The focus on Mr Spedding was myopic and blinkered. There was no consideration given to alternatives to his guilt. Police closed their minds to the possibility of his innocence, and the focus on him as a suspect distracted them from pursuing other leads in their investigation. It was the worst possible example of poor policing, and the damage that can be brought by it."
- from the media release by O'Brien Criminal & Civil Solicitors (tweet by @obriensolicitor 01 Dec 2022), in Statement by Principal Solicitor, Peter O'Brien
 
Imagine being born into this world with parents who are junkies which made you be taken into the care of these scumbags

Unfortunately, it is a common occurrence in the welfare system, sometimes kids are taken into care by even more violent abusers than where they were originally
 
stormbird said:
Justice Harrison's judgment, Supreme Court NSW, 01 Dec 2022: Spedding v State of New South Wales [2022] NSWSC 1627
Click to expand...
With the high level of CPI/inflation this year, the total payable to Spedding will probably be over $1.5m?

'Interest​

322 Mr Spedding is entitled to interest on some but not all of the damages I have awarded. I will require the parties to agree upon the interest calculations and to provide me with a minute of an order that specifies the appropriate sum.

DECISION​

323 I make the following orders:
  1. Judgment for the plaintiff for $1,484,292 plus interest on those heads of damage that attract interest.
  2. I direct the parties within 7 days to provide my Associate with a minute of an order calculating interest in accordance with these reasons.
  3. I order the defendant to pay the plaintiff’s costs.'
 
stormbird said:
Justice Harrison's judgment, Supreme Court NSW, 01 Dec 2022: Spedding v State of New South Wales [2022] NSWSC 1627
Click to expand...
From the Judgement document, here are Justice Harrison's Conclusion Statements on
  • malicious prosecution
  • reasonable and probable cause to institute the criminal prosecution of Spedding
  • liability

'Conclusion​

127 In my view, it is clear to the point of demonstration, and I find, that Detective Brennan, Inspector Jubelin and the Director of Public Prosecutions were each, or at any relevant time one of them was, a prosecutor for the purpose of the tort of malicious prosecution. They were actively involved in the conduct of the criminal proceedings in the sense of setting them in motion and maintaining them. Indeed, Detective Brennan’s summary is an obvious manifestation of his role in monitoring their progress until conclusion.'

'Conclusion​

187 I am satisfied that there was no reasonable or probable cause to institute or maintain the criminal prosecution against Mr Spedding.

188 The sexual assault allegations against Mr Spedding arose out of a malignant contest between embittered protagonists in the Family Court in 1987. They were exhaustively explored and considered in that setting by a well-respected and experienced judge. His conclusions were unambiguous. The material to which he made reference made it clear that the allegations of sexual assaults upon Mr Spedding’s daughters were the result of poisonous attempts by various people to manufacture heinous allegations against Mr Spedding for a collateral purpose.

189 I observe immediately that it is no part of a prosecutor’s function to usurp the role of the jury. Prosecutorial discretion does not extend to the making of decisions not to prosecute where there exists good evidence from which a jury might reasonably conclude that an offence has been committed. That includes the fact that the decision of a judge in unrelated proceedings, such as Gee J in the Family Court, is not binding upon putative prosecutors.

190 However, the material available to the prosecutors in this case, considered as a whole and not in a piecemeal or disconnected manner, supported an overwhelming inference that the allegations of sexual assault upon his daughters against Mr Spedding were concocted and false and could not be supported. I accept that the question is whether the prosecutor had reasonable and probable cause to do what he did, not whether, regardless of his knowledge or belief, there was reasonable and probable cause for a charge to be laid. In the present case, I am satisfied not only that Detective Brennan and Inspector Jubelin, and thereby the Director of Public Prosecutions, were armed with evidence that did not objectively support the institution or maintenance of the criminal proceedings against Mr Spedding but also that if they honestly held any such frail belief, they could not have done so, and did not do so, on reasonable grounds.

191 Even accepting somewhat charitably for the purposes of the argument, that the decision to prosecute was taken quickly “in order to protect the community from Mr Spedding as a suspected child sexual offender”, and not because it suited the strategy surrounding the investigation of the disappearance of William Tyrrell, by the time the matter eventually came on for hearing before Sweeney DCJ, if not well before, the officers had material that must, and certainly should, have led them to doubt the viability of the case. Rodney Spedding was in the caravan and was emphatically telling them what he had for years consistently been telling anyone who cared to listen, that his mother made it all up. That assertion coincided entirely with Gee J’s conclusions three decades before. The intervening years only served to confirm the utter hopelessness of the prosecution case.

192 It is timely in this context to record part of Inspector Jubelin's somewhat forthcoming acceptance of propositions put to him concerning the viability of the charges against Mr Spedding. These were offered when I interrupted his cross-examination to ask him the following questions:
"HIS HONOUR: Just before you leave that - I'm terribly sorry to interrupt. At the time that Mr Spedding was charged were you aware or had you become aware of the opinion of his son, Rodney Spedding, that, in effect, the historical sexual assault allegations from 1987 or thereabouts were effectively baseless because the children had been put up to make them or repeat them by Mr Spedding's former wife, Cathryn Hillsley?

A. I, I'm not sure when that information was forthcoming. I think it might have come at a later stage.

Q. How much later? To you, I mean.

A. Sorry. To …

Q. How much later did it come to you?

A. I think well after the charging. My, my understanding - and, again, from memory 'cause I don't have access to, to records or I can't confer with people about it - is that he was reluctant to provide a statement. I remember that Detective Brennan said he would often speak to him and - in an attempt to get a statement. And I think it was - it might have been months or a year later, but he was forthcoming with a - with a statement.

Q. And do you accept that, when he gave that statement, it was apparent that he was of the view that I've just described to you?

A. I, I think - I think so, your Honour. Yes.

Q. Were the proceedings against Mr Spedding which, by then, were in train reviewed by you in light of Mr Rodney Spedding's view that the charges were, if you like, trumped up? Say again - the allegations were the product of Mr Spedding's former wife.

A. No. By, by that stage, the DPP had carriage of the - carriage of the matter is my understanding. And they were handling the matter through the courts."
193 I am satisfied that the criminal proceedings were instituted and maintained against Mr Spedding without reasonable or probable cause.'

'Conclusions on liability​

225 I am satisfied that Mr Spedding has established that, with the exception of the claim for false imprisonment, he is entitled to damages on the causes of action pleaded in his amended statement of claim.'
 
What will happen to the ex-NSW DPP as a result of this judgement?

Might he (and Jubelin or Brennan) be personally charged or prosecuted for anything related to this judgement?

If he hasn't retired from legal work already, will the ex-DPP possibly have his accreditation to practice law revoked?

The NSW DPP from 2011-2021.

Lloyd Babb - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

www.smh.com.au

DPP chief vows to be independent, opinionated

THE NEW Director of Public Prosecutions, Lloyd Babb, SC, vowed he would not be stopped from "expressing an opinion" despite being the first person appointed to the office for only one 10-year term.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au

www.smh.com.au

The top cop, the journalist and the lunch that nearly halted a murder trial

Former police commissioner Mick Fuller’s involvement in the Teacher’s Pet podcast raises crucial questions about the application of justice, a judge has found.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au
'Babb attended a school at which Dawson was the sports master in 1984 '

(see here and here in the The Teachers Pet Podcast & Chris Dawson's Murder Trial thread for more on the above two Australian newspaper articles)
 
Last edited:

(Log in to remove this ad.)

BFew said:
From the Judgement document, here are Justice Harrison's Conclusion Statements on
  • malicious prosecution
  • reasonable and probable cause to institute the criminal prosecution of Spedding
  • liability

'Conclusion​

127 In my view, it is clear to the point of demonstration, and I find, that Detective Brennan, Inspector Jubelin and the Director of Public Prosecutions were each, or at any relevant time one of them was, a prosecutor for the purpose of the tort of malicious prosecution. They were actively involved in the conduct of the criminal proceedings in the sense of setting them in motion and maintaining them. Indeed, Detective Brennan’s summary is an obvious manifestation of his role in monitoring their progress until conclusion.'

'Conclusion​

187 I am satisfied that there was no reasonable or probable cause to institute or maintain the criminal prosecution against Mr Spedding.

188 The sexual assault allegations against Mr Spedding arose out of a malignant contest between embittered protagonists in the Family Court in 1987. They were exhaustively explored and considered in that setting by a well-respected and experienced judge. His conclusions were unambiguous. The material to which he made reference made it clear that the allegations of sexual assaults upon Mr Spedding’s daughters were the result of poisonous attempts by various people to manufacture heinous allegations against Mr Spedding for a collateral purpose.

189 I observe immediately that it is no part of a prosecutor’s function to usurp the role of the jury. Prosecutorial discretion does not extend to the making of decisions not to prosecute where there exists good evidence from which a jury might reasonably conclude that an offence has been committed. That includes the fact that the decision of a judge in unrelated proceedings, such as Gee J in the Family Court, is not binding upon putative prosecutors.

190 However, the material available to the prosecutors in this case, considered as a whole and not in a piecemeal or disconnected manner, supported an overwhelming inference that the allegations of sexual assault upon his daughters against Mr Spedding were concocted and false and could not be supported. I accept that the question is whether the prosecutor had reasonable and probable cause to do what he did, not whether, regardless of his knowledge or belief, there was reasonable and probable cause for a charge to be laid. In the present case, I am satisfied not only that Detective Brennan and Inspector Jubelin, and thereby the Director of Public Prosecutions, were armed with evidence that did not objectively support the institution or maintenance of the criminal proceedings against Mr Spedding but also that if they honestly held any such frail belief, they could not have done so, and did not do so, on reasonable grounds.

191 Even accepting somewhat charitably for the purposes of the argument, that the decision to prosecute was taken quickly “in order to protect the community from Mr Spedding as a suspected child sexual offender”, and not because it suited the strategy surrounding the investigation of the disappearance of William Tyrrell, by the time the matter eventually came on for hearing before Sweeney DCJ, if not well before, the officers had material that must, and certainly should, have led them to doubt the viability of the case. Rodney Spedding was in the caravan and was emphatically telling them what he had for years consistently been telling anyone who cared to listen, that his mother made it all up. That assertion coincided entirely with Gee J’s conclusions three decades before. The intervening years only served to confirm the utter hopelessness of the prosecution case.

192 It is timely in this context to record part of Inspector Jubelin's somewhat forthcoming acceptance of propositions put to him concerning the viability of the charges against Mr Spedding. These were offered when I interrupted his cross-examination to ask him the following questions:
"HIS HONOUR: Just before you leave that - I'm terribly sorry to interrupt. At the time that Mr Spedding was charged were you aware or had you become aware of the opinion of his son, Rodney Spedding, that, in effect, the historical sexual assault allegations from 1987 or thereabouts were effectively baseless because the children had been put up to make them or repeat them by Mr Spedding's former wife, Cathryn Hillsley?

A. I, I'm not sure when that information was forthcoming. I think it might have come at a later stage.

Q. How much later? To you, I mean.

A. Sorry. To …

Q. How much later did it come to you?

A. I think well after the charging. My, my understanding - and, again, from memory 'cause I don't have access to, to records or I can't confer with people about it - is that he was reluctant to provide a statement. I remember that Detective Brennan said he would often speak to him and - in an attempt to get a statement. And I think it was - it might have been months or a year later, but he was forthcoming with a - with a statement.

Q. And do you accept that, when he gave that statement, it was apparent that he was of the view that I've just described to you?

A. I, I think - I think so, your Honour. Yes.

Q. Were the proceedings against Mr Spedding which, by then, were in train reviewed by you in light of Mr Rodney Spedding's view that the charges were, if you like, trumped up? Say again - the allegations were the product of Mr Spedding's former wife.

A. No. By, by that stage, the DPP had carriage of the - carriage of the matter is my understanding. And they were handling the matter through the courts."
193 I am satisfied that the criminal proceedings were instituted and maintained against Mr Spedding without reasonable or probable cause.'

'Conclusions on liability​

225 I am satisfied that Mr Spedding has established that, with the exception of the claim for false imprisonment, he is entitled to damages on the causes of action pleaded in his amended statement of claim.'
Click to expand...

How old would Rodney Spedding have been in 1987?
 
stormbird said:
Bill Spedding maliciously prosecuted by NSW Police: Court confirms
Click to expand...
Not just NSW Police.
The NSW DPP too.
BFew said:
From the Judgement document, here are Justice Harrison's Conclusion Statements on
  • malicious prosecution
    .....
    'Conclusion
    127 In my view, it is clear to the point of demonstration, and I find, that Detective Brennan, Inspector Jubelin and the Director of Public Prosecutions were each, or at any relevant time one of them was, a prosecutor for the purpose of the tort of malicious prosecution. They were actively involved in the conduct of the criminal proceedings in the sense of setting them in motion and maintaining them. Indeed, Detective Brennan’s summary is an obvious manifestation of his role in monitoring their progress until conclusion.'
Click to expand...
 
ZionMig22 said:
Imagine being born into this world with parents who are junkies which made you be taken into the care of these scumbags

Unfortunately, it is a common occurrence in the welfare system, sometimes kids are taken into care by even more violent abusers than where they were originally
Click to expand...
That's a pretty harsh assessment ('junkies'). Some people are more prone than others to become addicted or suffer from substance abuse.
There is no evidence that William or his sister, or any of the other siblings have ever come to actual harm at the hands of their biological parents.
William's biological mother appears to be capable of looking after at least some of her children (i.e. they are still alive and well in her care).
William's biological father seems to have suffered immensely from William's fate, and although he is known to be a convicted addict, and probably not an ideal father, I don't see that he deserved to have his 3YO son permanently removed from him without being given any chance of rehabilitation or reconciliation.
I have immense sympathy for both of William's parents. They are not perfect but they didn't deserve this. I don't know anybody who deserves this.
 
BFew said:
What will happen to the ex-NSW DPP as a result of this judgement?

Might he (and Jubelin or Brennan) be personally charged or prosecuted for anything related to this judgement?

If he hasn't retired from legal work already, will the ex-DPP possibly have his accreditation to practice law revoked?

The NSW DPP from 2011-2021.

Lloyd Babb - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

www.smh.com.au

DPP chief vows to be independent, opinionated

THE NEW Director of Public Prosecutions, Lloyd Babb, SC, vowed he would not be stopped from "expressing an opinion" despite being the first person appointed to the office for only one 10-year term.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au

www.smh.com.au

The top cop, the journalist and the lunch that nearly halted a murder trial

Former police commissioner Mick Fuller’s involvement in the Teacher’s Pet podcast raises crucial questions about the application of justice, a judge has found.
www.smh.com.au www.smh.com.au
'Babb attended a school at which Dawson was the sports master in 1984 '

(see here and here in the The Teachers Pet Podcast & Chris Dawson's Murder Trial thread for more on the above two Australian newspaper articles)
Click to expand...


What is the purpose of your post, i.e the links you offer ?
 
31550 said:
That's a pretty harsh assessment ('junkies'). Some people are more prone than others to become addicted or suffer from substance abuse.
There is no evidence that William or his sister, or any of the other siblings have ever come to actual harm at the hands of their biological parents.
William's biological mother appears to be capable of looking after at least some of her children (i.e. they are still alive and well in her care).
William's biological father seems to have suffered immensely from William's fate, and although he is known to be a convicted addict, and probably not an ideal father, I don't see that he deserved to have his 3YO son permanently removed from him without being given any chance of rehabilitation or reconciliation.
I have immense sympathy for both of William's parents. They are not perfect but they didn't deserve this. I don't know anybody who deserves this.
Click to expand...

Yep shouldn't used those words but in reality his own parents failed him
 
Assuming that there is no appeal by the State of NSW into today's Bill Spedding case Judgement, will anyone representing the State Government, that used to work for NSW Government, or that was adversely named by Justice Harrison in his Judgement today, now apologise for their actions or the NSW Government's actions?

Spedding v State of New South Wales - NSW Caselaw

www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au
'Neither the officers nor the ODPP has apologised for their actions.'
 
Kwality said:
spit it out (with due respect)
Click to expand...
There's this.

'OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS MEDIA STATEMENT
7th August 2018 Matter of Dawson Statement from Lloyd Babb SC, Director of Public Prosecutions NSW The Australian newspaper has sought my response to a series of questions about the request from NSW Police Force for legal advice on the sufficiency of current evidence regarding the disappearance of Lynette Dawson in 1982. ...'
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

MrsBlueSky
Current Andre Rebelo - charged with murdering his mother
Replies
0
Views
518
MrsBlueSky
MrsBlueSky
Kurve
Arrest of former SA Liberal Leader on Drug Supply Charges
2
Replies
27
Views
1K
Matt Stevic
M
Kurve
Current Disappearance of 19yo Jay Slater - Tenerife
Replies
18
Views
900
A11dAtP0w3R
A11dAtP0w3R
Kurve
Unsolved The Disappearance of Mum Bronwyn Winfield - NSW * Hedley Thomas podcast
2 3 4 5
Replies
116
Views
7K
BFew
BFew
J
Barry Cable: Found guilty of child abuse in civil case, pleading not guilty to criminal charges, honours have been revoked
Replies
4
Views
548
Teagueeee15
T
Kurve
The Disappearance of 12yo Lisa Mott - WA
Replies
10
Views
2K
Eaglette01
E
zedx
Current Shooting Murder of Chloe Mason * Two arrests with claims of self defence
Replies
22
Views
436
Macca180
Macca180

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top