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

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Case adjourned. The wheels of justice turn slowly, and often don't move at all

Maybe they did. Just not the result you wanted?

 

[31550]

Maybe they did. Just not the result you wanted?

Possibly you don't understand what an adjournment is? It's a delay or postponement. It does not move the case forward in any particular direction. So, the 'result wanted' is irrelevant. Wheels are not moving.

 

[Awakening]

Ok so rumours the charges were dropped were just rumours

 

[stormbird]

Ok so rumours the charges were dropped were just rumours

Have there been any rumours that explain what's going on? Is it true the hearing has been delayed - if it has, then why? Thanks.

 

[Awakening]

Have there been any rumours that explain what's going on? Is it true the hearing has been delayed - if it has, then why? Thanks.

Not that I know of. If I hear of anything I will post here.

I’m still wondering if charges will be dropped or if the police need more time to gather evidence?

 

[31550]

Daily Telegraph is reporting the assault cases against the fosters won't be heard until September 2023.
Foster father's case of lying to NSWCC is down for mention mid February.
The article is paywalled - looking for a non-paywalled version to post a link.

 

[BFew]

Daily Telegraph is reporting the assault cases against the fosters won't be heard until September 2023.
Foster father's case of lying to NSWCC is down for mention mid February.
The article is paywalled - looking for a non-paywalled version to post a link.

I assume the other reason(s) for the 9 month postponement are all covered under suppressions orders.
That only the reason of late service of the police brief of evidence on the defence was not covered by a suppression order.
And that(hypothetically) this late service on it's own, would result in a delay of much <9 months, if it was the only reason.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-nsw/delay-in-latest-william-tyrrell-case/news-story/21a07e9a4880ac88827ca39e7f619db7

Case against William Tyrrell’s foster parents delayed​

Janet Fife-Yeomans​

January 19, 2023 - 12:40PM​

'Parramatta Local Court has been told that evidence from police has been late in being handed to the defence lawyers for the couple so the hearing, listed for next week, has been postponed.'

'Their cases were due to be heard next week but have been postponed until September 4 at Parramatta Local Court for a number of reasons including the late service of the police brief of evidence on the defence.

“The adjournment was opposed by the police who said they were ready to go ahead with the case.”'

 

[stormbird]

I assume the other reason(s) for the 9 month postponement are all covered under suppressions orders.
That only the reason of late service of the police brief of evidence on the defence was not covered by a suppression order.
And that(hypothetically) this late service on it's own, would result in a delay of much <9 months, if it was the only reason.

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts-nsw/delay-in-latest-william-tyrrell-case/news-story/21a07e9a4880ac88827ca39e7f619db7

Case against William Tyrrell’s foster parents delayed​

Janet Fife-Yeomans​

January 19, 2023 - 12:40PM​

'Parramatta Local Court has been told that evidence from police has been late in being handed to the defence lawyers for the couple so the hearing, listed for next week, has been postponed.'

'Their cases were due to be heard next week but have been postponed until September 4 at Parramatta Local Court for a number of reasons including the late service of the police brief of evidence on the defence.

“The adjournment was opposed by the police who said they were ready to go ahead with the case.”'

re: "... the police brief of evidence on the defence was not covered by a suppression order.
And that (hypothetically) this late service on it's own, would result in a delay of much <9 months, if it was the only reason."

But September might be the first available court booking. I think the date doesn't indicate how much extra time the parties might need or who is to blame for the delay. MOO

 

[31550]

re: "... the police brief of evidence on the defence was not covered by a suppression order.
And that (hypothetically) this late service on it's own, would result in a delay of much <9 months, if it was the only reason."

But September might be the first available court booking. I think the date doesn't indicate how much extra time the parties might need or who is to blame for the delay. MOO

I read that the latest adjournment was requested by counsel for the defence. The grounds given were that the prosecution / police were late in tendering evidence. The presiding judge apparently agreed that the evidence had been tendered too late for the defence to adequatley prepare. So, the question is, given the charges relate to alleged offences from 2021 (if not earlier) why did it take the prosecution so long to deliver evidence to the defence counsel?

 

[stormbird]

I read that the latest adjournment was requested by counsel for the defence. The grounds given were that the prosecution / police were late in tendering evidence. The presiding judge apparently agreed that the evidence had been tendered too late for the defence to adequatley prepare. So, the question is, given the charges relate to alleged offences from 2021 (if not earlier) why did it take the prosecution so long to deliver evidence to the defence counsel?

Bolded by me, and I think it's a good question.

 

[stormbird]

The washing machine repairman's case is back on the NSW Online Registry:

Date: 22 Feb 2023
Case number: 2019/00289937 [same as for the judgment last year]
Location: Supreme Court Sydney
Listing type: Directions (Common Law Registrar)

Last year, 7 News reported that NSW Police Force would be appealing the payout (see post 7,850). So, is that correct? I couldn't find any other reports or confirmation. Would "directions (common law registrar)" in the NSW Supreme Court be one step towards an appeal in the NSW Court of Appeal, or might there be something else going on?

 

[31550]

The washing machine repairman's case is back on the NSW Online Registry:

Date: 22 Feb 2023
Case number: 2019/00289937 [same as for the judgment last year]
Location: Supreme Court Sydney
Listing type: Directions (Common Law Registrar)

Last year, 7 News reported that NSW Police Force would be appealing the payout (see post 7,850). So, is that correct? I couldn't find any other reports or confirmation. Would "directions (common law registrar)" in the NSW Supreme Court be one step towards an appeal in the NSW Court of Appeal, or might there be something else going on?

I don't think a Directions hearing is a step towards an appeal. It's usually a brief hearing to 'direct' the next course of action AFTER a decision has been made, or if previous 'directions' have not been complied with.

E.g. If Spedding was awarded monetary compensation, the 'Direction' might be for Police to pay a certain amount on a certain date to a certain account.

I suppose if an Appeal has been lodged and accepted the 'Direction' might also be to hold off on or cancel a previously-ordered action or payment?

 

[stormbird]

Update in William Tyrrell foster dad’s case of allegedly lying to the NSW Crime Commission, News.com.au, 13 Feb 2023

“The foster father of William Tyrrell will fight the allegation he lied to the NSW Crime Commission at the end of the year after the matter was pushed back until after he fights assault charges, a court has been told.
The 55-year-old man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has pleaded not guilty to one charge of lying or misleading NSW Crime Commission officials and was due to face a hearing in March.
The commission was examining William’s disappearance.
Sydney’s Downing Centre Local Court was on Monday told the hearing would have to be pushed back until he faced a different hearing at Parramatta Local Court.
...
New hearing dates of November 6 and 7 were confirmed, with the matter to be mentioned briefly in September.
Both foster parents will face a hearing over charges of common assault and stalk and intimidation in relation to another child who is not William in September."
BBM

 

[DropBearess]

Update in William Tyrrell foster dad’s case of allegedly lying to the NSW Crime Commission, News.com.au, 13 Feb 2023

“The foster father of William Tyrrell will fight the allegation he lied to the NSW Crime Commission at the end of the year after the matter was pushed back until after he fights assault charges, a court has been told.
The 55-year-old man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, has pleaded not guilty to one charge of lying or misleading NSW Crime Commission officials and was due to face a hearing in March.
The commission was examining William’s disappearance.
Sydney’s Downing Centre Local Court was on Monday told the hearing would have to be pushed back until he faced a different hearing at Parramatta Local Court.
...
New hearing dates of November 6 and 7 were confirmed, with the matter to be mentioned briefly in September.
Both foster parents will face a hearing over charges of common assault and stalk and intimidation in relation to another child who is not William in September."
BBM

Words fail me.

 

[31550]

Words fail me.

IKR

They can't hear the lying charge against FF until after they hear the assault charge. So why didn't they go ahead and hear the assault charge?

They couldn't hear the assault charges against FM until the 'mental health' assessment was done ... so they did one.
But they went ahead and heard the lying charge against FM (found not guilty of deliberately lying) BEFORE they heard the assault charge.
Where's the logic?

It's like, the more things you are charged with, the less likely any of them will ever be put before the court.

I said it before

Case adjourned. The wheels of justice turn slowly, and often don't move at all

 

[stormbird]

I did some googling to look for news about Strike Force Rosann (does it still exist?), but couldn't find any updates. But there was this (in relation to an upcoming webinar for the Royal Australian College of General Practitioners):

---

Detective Chief Inspector David Laidlaw APM [who will be one of five presenters]

Investigation Coordinator, Coronial Liaison and Review Team, Unsolved Homicide Team, Homicide Squad, State Crime Command, NSW Police

DCI Laidlaw joined NSW Police in 1977 and has worked in Major Crime Squads (primarily Homicide Squad) since 1995. Becoming Manager of the Coronial Investigation Team in 2007, DCI Laidlaw acts as liaison between NSW Police, the Coroner and NSW Health Pathology.

- Death certificates and coronial processes – engaging with coronial pathway partners
RACGP Events, Webinar 8 Mar, 7:30 PM - 8:30 PM (AEDT)

---

I've never heard of the "Coronial Liaison and Review Team" and I can't remember anyone ever mentioning it in relation to Det Ch Insp Laidlaw's work on William's case.

 

[Kurve]

Not sure if I've mentioned this in here before but this is something that's been playing on my mind for a while. As technology gets better and the police relying so heavily on CCTV through their investigations, I've noticed more teenagers seem to be getting caught for serious violent crime.

Do we know if there was any mention of the police checking with the local schools for absences? If I'm thinking even then it seems an obvious thing to do and probably would not have gone unnoticed?

 

[DropBearess]

Not sure if I've mentioned this in here before but this is something that's been playing on my mind for a while. As technology gets better and the police relying so heavily on CCTV through their investigations, I've noticed more teenagers seem to be getting caught for serious violent crime.

Do we know if there was any mention of the police checking with the local schools for absences? If I'm thinking even then it seems an obvious thing to do and probably would not have gone unnoticed?

You would hope they would check but given the investigative bungle from the beginning, l doubt it. Little James Bulger's 10 year old killers were identified by CCTV and the fact they were not present at school that day.

 

[BFew]

Do we know if there was any mention of the police checking with the local schools for absences? If I'm thinking even then it seems an obvious thing to do and probably would not have gone unnoticed?

For students refusing to go to school, without a legit reason, telling them that they might become suspects in any known or known unknown local crime cases when they are absent from school, might have them think thrice about refusing to go to school, or leaving school early, without a valid reason.

Although this could backfire, if it results in too many students that should not be at school due to illness, going to school when they should not.

 

[31550]

Not sure if I've mentioned this in here before but this is something that's been playing on my mind for a while. As technology gets better and the police relying so heavily on CCTV through their investigations, I've noticed more teenagers seem to be getting caught for serious violent crime.

Do we know if there was any mention of the police checking with the local schools for absences? If I'm thinking even then it seems an obvious thing to do and probably would not have gone unnoticed?

I guess it would have been a possible line of inquiry. However, school is only compulsory for children under 15 years old. It is hard to imagine a child of this age being involved in William's disappearance - it's not like the Bolger case, as Benaroon Drive is quite remote, and a vehicle would have been required to get in and out. Bolger was lured away from a public playground in a populated area. William was removed from a remote private house.

It would have been worthwhile checking local businesses and asking if any employees were unexpectedly absent from work on the day of William's disappearance. I'd be surprised if this wasn't done.

 

[Kurve]

However, school is only compulsory for children under 15 years old.

Relevance?

It is hard to imagine a child of this age being involved in William's disappearance

Yes it is yet we see it and are seeing it more which is why I raised it.

Benaroon Drive is quite remote, and a vehicle would have been required to get in and out.

Unless it was a kid who lived nearby who was supposed to be at school.

it's not like the Bolger case,

I didn't mention the James Bolger case.

 

[31550]

Relevance?



Yes it is yet we see it and are seeing it more which is why I raised it.



Unless it was a kid who lived nearby who was supposed to be at school.



I didn't mention the James Bolger case.

A car would have been required to remove William from Benaroon Drive. Otherwise the ground search would have found him.

 

[Kurve]

A car would have been required to remove William from Benaroon Drive. Otherwise the ground search would have found him.

I'm pretty sure they didn't search every house in Kendall.

 

[31550]

I'm pretty sure they didn't search every house in Kendall.

I'm pretty sure they didn't either. But I'm not sure what you are suggesting happened? A local kid wags school, walks all the way to Benaroon Drive, abducts William, takes him to a nearby property and hides him away during the ground search? All on foot with no vehicle involved and unseen by anyone to raise suspicion? They would have to live very close to Benaroon.

I'm pretty sure a vehicle needed to be involved for the perpetrator to get to Benaroon and remove William without being seen. This means involving someone who owned, or had access to a vehicle, and was capable of driving without attracting attention, so probably not a schoolkid.

 

[Kurve]

I guess it would have been a possible line of inquiry. However, school is only compulsory for children under 15 years old.

It's actually 17 years old in NSW and while I don't think it's likely William was lured or taken away by a older child, it would be interesting to know if the police checked school attendances.