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

[Kurve]

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

 

[Kwality]

You appear to be acting like a defamation lawyer's lackey, fishing/baiting.

Asked a straight forward question because I cant understand your post. No ulterior motive. Que sera.

 

[BFew]

Ex Ch10, now ABC crime reporter Lia Harris, reunites with criminologist Xanthe Mallett again this morning, to Batwoman and Robyn like speculate on the bleeding obvious.

Alternatively, NSW Government/Police/DCJ might just increase NSW Police's and NSW DPP's annual budget and/or contingency budget for legal costs, and civil lawsuit settlements.

NSW Police may change investigation tactics after $1.5m payout to former William Tyrrell suspect, criminologist says

A win by former suspect in toddler William Tyrrell 's disappearance, Bill Spedding, against NSW Police for malicious prosecution may force detectives to change the way they pursue suspects when they are not making progress in a case, a leading criminologist says.

www.abc.net.au

'NSW Police investigation tactics may change after Bill Spedding pay out, criminologist says​

By crime reporter Lia Harris
Posted 4h ago'

'NSW Police may be forced to take a more cautious approach with their investigation tactics'

'His win in court on Thursday has experts predicting the police may now hesitate before using the same strategy in future investigations.'

'Internationally renowned criminologist Xanthe Mallett from the University of Newcastle said the court's decision could prompt internal change in the force.
"Putting pressure on suspects using additional charges for unrelated matters is something we've seen before and since," Associate Professor Mallett said.
"[But] I think it will cause police forces [to] pause when employing some of these strategies in the future.
"I think it may make them more cautious with some of their tactics now that they've been openly criticised for some of the more potentially cynical aspects of this case."'

 

[stormbird]

If the strike force knows:

• that William did not wander off and was not found
• roughly when he was last seen and roughly when he was discovered to be missing (the window of opportunity)
• where he was when last seen
• who was in the vicinity during that period
• who could have been in the vicinity during that period

then isn't the investigation just a process of whittling down the list of all possible persons of interest (i.e. everyone who could have been in the vicinity) until there's no one left except the actual offender(s)? That's my guess, based on ignorance. And maybe there aren't ways for police to be sure the initial list of POIs includes everyone. And maybe there aren't ways to investigate people unless police have grounds to suspect their involvement.

What worries me is that the strike force during the pursuit of the washing machine repairman seems not to have checked even basic information: they didn't check his alibis or presumably even the CCTV record for his vehicle (no one explained, but how did they propose he might have driven from Laurieton to/from Kendall without being spotted on any of probably several cameras?). What if they were similarly lax with everyone else and eliminated people who should have been investigated further? Obviously the foster parents were eliminated and are now under investigation, but maybe there are still other possible candidates who haven't been considered. MOO

 

[31550]

If the strike force knows:

• that William did not wander off and was not found
• roughly when he was last seen and roughly when he was discovered to be missing (the window of opportunity)
• where he was when last seen
• who was in the vicinity during that period
• who could have been in the vicinity during that period

then isn't the investigation just a process of whittling down the list of all possible persons of interest (i.e. everyone who could have been in the vicinity) until there's no one left except the actual offender(s)? That's my guess, based on ignorance. And maybe there aren't ways for police to be sure the initial list of POIs includes everyone. And maybe there aren't ways to investigate people unless police have grounds to suspect their involvement.

What worries me is that the strike force during the pursuit of the washing machine repairman seems not to have checked even basic information: they didn't check his alibis or presumably even the CCTV record for his vehicle (no one explained, but how did they propose he might have driven from Laurieton to/from Kendall without being spotted on any of probably several cameras?). What if they were similarly lax with everyone else and eliminated people who should have been investigated further? Obviously the foster parents were eliminated and are now under investigation, but maybe there are still other possible candidates who haven't been considered. MOO

• that William did not wander off and was not found

This seems quite unlikely as the ground search and sniffer dogs did not find him. But William may have been intercepted or moved early on. Nearby properties were not all extensively searched immediately.

• roughly when he was last seen and roughly when he was discovered to be missing (the window of opportunity)
• where he was last seen

There is no certainty about this. It can be any time between 9:37 when the photo was taken, and around 10:30 when FF returned home, and neighbours were alerted. Between those times we only have the inconsistent testimony of the foster family to go on.

• who was in the vicinity during that period
• who could have been in the vicinity during that period

Police have been through hundreds of potential POIs. It's interesting that they focussed so intensely on Spedding (who was proven to not be in the area at the time). There are several (former) POIs who were known to be in the area and who do not have cast-iron alibis (e.g Owen, Abbott) yet these people do not seem to be currently under active investigation.

It seems to me the case is still wide open. The only scenario probably ruled out is a "pure accident, wandered off", as William has not been found.

 

[Pies1990]

Daniel Morecombe's parents cut ties with William Tyrrell charity Daniel Morecombe's parents cut ties with William Tyrrell charity

The Daniel Morcombe Foundation have distanced themselves from the WW foundation, after they still have them listed on their website as taking donations towards finding William.

Big news and a big blow to whoever runs the WW page/foundation. The Morcombe’s are well-respected throughout australia and for them to distance themselves from the Wheres William Foundation speaks volumes. The WWF weren’t listed as a charity and the FP’s have been under the spotlight for the past 12 months


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[stormbird]

Daniel Morecombe's parents cut ties with William Tyrrell charity Daniel Morecombe's parents cut ties with William Tyrrell charity

The Daniel Morcombe Foundation have distanced themselves from the WW foundation, after they still have them listed on their website as taking donations towards finding William.

Big news and a big blow to whoever runs the WW page/foundation. The Morcombe’s are well-respected throughout australia and for them to distance themselves from the Wheres William Foundation speaks volumes. The WWF weren’t listed as a charity and the FP’s have been under the spotlight for the past 12 months


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From Pies1990's link:

"The Daniel Morcombe Foundation informed inquirers it has not been connected with [the Where's William campaign] 'for some years. We do not fundraise or collect donations on their behalf'.
'I am aware our name and logo are still appearing on the "Where's William" website ... and we are endeavouring to get these removed,' the email read.

- Daily Mail Australia, 04 Dec 2022, bolded by me

 

[stormbird]

From Pies1990's link:

"The Daniel Morcombe Foundation informed inquirers it has not been connected with [the Where's William campaign] 'for some years. We do not fundraise or collect donations on their behalf'.
'I am aware our name and logo are still appearing on the "Where's William" website ... and we are endeavouring to get these removed,' the email read.

- Daily Mail Australia, 04 Dec 2022, bolded by me

And from the same link again:

"The inquest into William's disappearance by NSW Coroner Harriet Grahame is on hold as police continue to search for the missing boy's remains.
A four-week search at Kendall, and in particular along Batar Creek Road in the town, was conducted a year ago, and in July police again returned to search further."

Bolded by me. If that's correct that police did a search in July 2022, it's interesting they kept it so quiet.

 

[BFew]

"The inquest into William's disappearance by NSW Coroner Harriet Grahame is on hold as police continue to search for the missing boy's remains.
A four-week search at Kendall, and in particular along Batar Creek Road in the town, was conducted a year ago, and in July police again returned to search further."

The court heard that after July last year the woman known as SD allegedly hit the girl with a wooden spoon and then 'kicked her on the floor' in what Magistrate Peter Feather described as the 'more serious' charge.

Wouldn't surprise me if the wooden spoon and kicking events were immediately followed by a new Kendall search in July 2021.

 

[31550]

From Pies1990's link:

"The Daniel Morcombe Foundation informed inquirers it has not been connected with [the Where's William campaign] 'for some years. We do not fundraise or collect donations on their behalf'.
'I am aware our name and logo are still appearing on the "Where's William" website ... and we are endeavouring to get these removed,' the email read.

- Daily Mail Australia, 04 Dec 2022, bolded by me

I find it interesting that it has been stated that "Where's William?" is not a charity and is therefore not entitled to seek public donations. Yet they have the following on their website.

I would be interested in seeing the financial reports of "Where's William", to see how much public money they received and where it went.
It has been reported that the Daniel Morecombe Foundation currently holds a small amount of money for "Where's William". Where do the proceeds of "Where's William" merchandise go then, if not to DMF?
I am assuming it goes to Insight Communications, who own the "Where's William" brand? Is this right? What are Insight doing with this money?

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

I am assuming it goes to Insight Communications, who own the "Where's William" brand? Is this right? What are Insight doing with this money?


The end of the first paragraph seems to be the sum total. Donations pay people to design posters and maintain a website. Sounds like an opportunistic grift to me.

 

[TheDudeAbides]

And from the same link again:

"The inquest into William's disappearance by NSW Coroner Harriet Grahame is on hold as police continue to search for the missing boy's remains.
A four-week search at Kendall, and in particular along Batar Creek Road in the town, was conducted a year ago, and in July police again returned to search further."

Bolded by me. If that's correct that police did a search in July 2022, it's interesting they kept it so quiet.

Bolded by me. I have been saying this occasionally in this thread a few times. We only know what the police want us to know about what is going on. They dont commentate on cases publicly unless they need public information / assistance.

Only once / if charges are laid and the evidence is presented in court will we find out more details...

 

[31550]

Bolded by me. I have been saying this occasionally in this thread a few times. We only know what the police want us to know about what is going on. They dont commentate on cases publicly unless they need public information / assistance.

Only once / if charges are laid and the evidence is presented in court will we find out more details...

Police told William’s foster mother ‘we know where, we know how, we know why’

Detectives had a stark message for William Tyrrell’s foster mother. Questioned in a Sydney court about the conversation, they denied that they were deliberately lying.

www.smh.com.au

“We know why, we know how, we know where he is,” Sergeant Scott Jamieson told the woman, who can only be identified by the pseudonym SD, in October 2021.

If they don't commentate on cases publicly, what is going on here? This is a comment made in a public arena. The officer would surely know that the media would pick it up and report it? What's the agenda? Why say this now, and not back in October 2021?

And from the same link again:

"The inquest into William's disappearance by NSW Coroner Harriet Grahame is on hold as police continue to search for the missing boy's remains.
A four-week search at Kendall, and in particular along Batar Creek Road in the town, was conducted a year ago, and in July police again returned to search further."

Bolded by me. If that's correct that police did a search in July 2022, it's interesting they kept it so quiet.

I think this means July 2021

 

[stormbird]

I find it interesting that it has been stated that "Where's William?" is not a charity and is therefore not entitled to seek public donations. Yet they have the following on their website.

I would be interested in seeing the financial reports of "Where's William", to see how much public money they received and where it went.
It has been reported that the Daniel Morecombe Foundation currently holds a small amount of money for "Where's William". Where do the proceeds of "Where's William" merchandise go then, if not to DMF?
I am assuming it goes to Insight Communications, who own the "Where's William" brand? Is this right? What are Insight doing with this money?

The newsroom tab on the Where's William? website has a bit of information about their campaign fundraising and expenses up to Dec 2018 but I can't find a way to link to the individual post, sorry: "Media Release: 13 July 2019 / "Where's William? Campaign Welcomes Support from Daniel Morcombe Foundation". It's not very detailed, though, and obviously not a financial report.

I don't understand why the Where's William? donations needed to go through other charities (unless it was so they could be tax-deductible?) but I can understand the fosters not wanting to set up a charity themselves. There's probably quite a lot of work involved in setting one up properly to meet regulations; and if they actually were not involved in William's disappearance then they were presumably hoping he would be found quickly (ending the need for further fundraising); plus the names of at least some of the people involved in the charity would be made public: the Charity Register can be searched by anyone.

 

[stormbird]

Bolded by me. I have been saying this occasionally in this thread a few times. We only know what the police want us to know about what is going on. They dont commentate on cases publicly unless they need public information / assistance.

Only once / if charges are laid and the evidence is presented in court will we find out more details...

The quiet searches are the interesting ones then, hey? That's my guess. If the police are doing searches without alerting media or the public, that could mean they're not trying to watch for reactions from persons of interest, and they're not trying to dredge up information from the public. That could mean they already know what they're looking for and where it is and just want to get on with it. MOO

 

[Awakening]

I had to laugh when I saw this in DM. It was in a Facebook group about a month ago. Members on there emailed DMF.

 

[Kurve]

I would be interested in seeing the financial reports of "Where's William", to see how much public money they received and where it went.
It has been reported that the Daniel Morecombe Foundation currently holds a small amount of money for "Where's William". Where do the proceeds of "Where's William" merchandise go then, if not to DMF?
I am assuming it goes to Insight Communications, who own the "Where's William" brand? Is this right? What are Insight doing with this money?

We looked in to this around March which was after I'd read in one of the books, Overington I think, where the PR firm had bragged that they'd essentially taken over the space and to the sacrifice of smaller grasroots campaigns.

On a closer look, I noticed they were drawing money from the campaign for 'Media Monitoring'. That was then removed, quite fast. They had several staff members monitoring media.

So there's that for a start.

 

[Kurve]

I had to laugh when I saw this in DM. It was in a Facebook group about a month ago. Members on there emailed DMF.

One of the facebook groups the PR firm couldn't infiltrate?

 

[31550]

One of the facebook groups the PR firm couldn't infiltrate?

You have to ask what possible reason a PR company could have, to continue its association with this case.
There is a $1 million reward still on offer.
The case is in the media daily.
We haven't forgotten about William.
What possible purpose does it serve to distribute "Where's William" merchandise? Why do we still need a "Where's Willam" website?

Yet, the PR ladies are flying the flag and accompanying FM to court and standing beside her as she gives media interviews.

Don't Insight have any other customers to promote?

 

[Kurve]

You have to ask what possible reason a PR company could have, to continue its association with this case.
There is a $1 million reward still on offer.
The case is in the media daily.
We haven't forgotten about William.
What possible purpose does it serve to distribute "Where's William" merchandise? Why do we still need a "Where's Willam" website?

Yet, the PR ladies are flying the flag and accompanying FM to court and standing beside her as she gives media interviews.

Don't Insight have any other customers to promote?

They might be taking and quite legitimately if unethically imo, management/admin fees. They're still selling merchandise outside the courts apparently.

The Morcombe's could take it a bit further and start asking questions.

 

[Awakening]

One of the facebook groups the PR firm couldn't infiltrate?

There’s a private private one. So a “fake” one then a back door one because yes they’ve previously infiltrated. Crazy stuff.

 

[Awakening]

You have to ask what possible reason a PR company could have, to continue its association with this case.
There is a $1 million reward still on offer.
The case is in the media daily.
We haven't forgotten about William.
What possible purpose does it serve to distribute "Where's William" merchandise? Why do we still need a "Where's Willam" website?

Yet, the PR ladies are flying the flag and accompanying FM to court and standing beside her as she gives media interviews.

Don't Insight have any other customers to promote?

Money, clout, connections, I dunno

 

[31550]

Money, clout, connections, I dunno

Sickening. If they were actually providing any useful service to a worthwhile cause, I would respect their right to earn a living from it, but they just appear to be self-serving parasites.

 

[TheDudeAbides]

Police told William’s foster mother ‘we know where, we know how, we know why’

Detectives had a stark message for William Tyrrell’s foster mother. Questioned in a Sydney court about the conversation, they denied that they were deliberately lying.

www.smh.com.au

“We know why, we know how, we know where he is,” Sergeant Scott Jamieson told the woman, who can only be identified by the pseudonym SD, in October 2021.

If they don't commentate on cases publicly, what is going on here? This is a comment made in a public arena. The officer would surely know that the media would pick it up and report it? What's the agenda? Why say this now, and not back in October 2021?


I think this means July 2021

Wasnt that evidence tendered in a court hearing, which is exactly what I said about hearing about further evidence in court..

Police arent going to ring the media up every morning and brief them on every detective's investigative diary for that day...

ANd the way that article is written clearly infers the further search was taken July 2022 IMO. "and police RETURNED to search FURTHER in july.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Wasnt that evidence tendered in a court hearing, which is exactly what I said about hearing about further evidence in court..

Police arent going to ring the media up every morning and brief them on every detective's investigative diary for that day...

ANd the way that article is written clearly infers the further search was taken July 2022 IMO. "and police RETURNED to search FURTHER in july.

I can’t get over how well she hid the body - incredible.

 

[stormbird]

Tonight on Media Watch (on ABC TV, or later on iView which requires logging in):

"Bill Spedding’s ‘terrible nightmare’. How police and the media targeted an innocent man in the William Tyrrell case."

- from a tweet by @ABCmediawatch, 05 Dec 2022