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

 

[31550]

I have more questions about the camera. Sorry if i am duplicating previous information but I missed some of the earlier posts about the time and "corrected" time.

For the FM's camera the internal clock is set manually. This clock can be changed for daylight saving or travelling to a different time zone to keep accurate time of your pictures. Would there be any history stored in the camera itself of change of the clock? If the camera is powered down or battery removed and a new time is set on the clock, is the previous time in the camera lost? The EXIF (yes i am learning) is embedded in the photo and is not easy to change.

Who "corrected" the photos time to AEST? Was this done after they were downloaded from the camera?

It seems, or is assumed, that the camera time was initially set to Bali time (2 hours/ 120 minutes) behind AEST. Photos are taken including one of a time on Sunrise TV. Possibility camera clock is then reset to a new time, 1 hour behind AEST. So now a photo taken at 8:30 AEST would have an EXIF of 7:30. Then the camera clock is reset again back to 2 hours before AEST. If then all the photos are corrected by adding on 2hours (or 118 minutes) ones that were taken with the first setting would be correct. But those taken with the one hour different camera clock setting would appear to be taken one hour later. The one taken at at 8:30 would have a corrected time of 9:30. Possible?

Camera keeps no history of time changes. It only knows its 'current time'.
Once the camera stores a photo, the EXIF data is stored along with the image data in the photo file, and cannot be manipulated without special software and technical expertise. Usually if the camera is powered down, the internal battery keeps the clock running - no need to set the time again unless the battery is removed or goes completely flat. Changing the time on the camera does not affect any photos already taken. Nobody 'corrected' the time on the photos. The 'corrected time' or 'adjusted time' referred to in this case is the time that the forensic lab experts calculated to be the ACTUAL time the photos were taken (after forensic examination of the camera and the data).

 

[LRitz]

Camera keeps no history of time changes. It only knows its 'current time'.
Once the camera stores a photo, the EXIF data is stored along with the image data in the photo file, and cannot be manipulated without special software and technical expertise. Usually if the camera is powered down, the internal battery keeps the clock running - no need to set the time again unless the battery is removed or goes completely flat. Changing the time on the camera does not affect any photos already taken. Nobody 'corrected' the time on the photos. The 'corrected time' or 'adjusted time' referred to in this case is the time that the forensic lab experts calculated to be the ACTUAL time the photos were taken (after forensic examination of the camera and the data).

The investigation seems locked in to the time line of WT being alive at 9:30.But the camera clock can be manipulated. Is it 100% sure, without any doubt, that the photos were taken at 9:30. It would take some planning but not technically difficult.

Possible scenario: The battery could be removed and then time reset. Photos taken at FGM house. The time then being reset (immediately) for a second time back to Bali time. So when the camera is handed over to police it is back on Bali time and fits in with the photo of the TV show time.

The "actual" time was calculated and corrected for all the photos. Nobody thinks that the photos were taken at 7:30. You suggest that the IT forensic could not see previous clock changes on the camera. What is the other possible "data"? Or did they examine the camera and see it was 2 hours behind AEST and assume this was the case unchanged from when the camera was purchased in Bali. This was also backed up the "coincidental" photo of the TV showing AEST. Once decided, written down, locked in, and accepted by inquest no one goes back to review decisions. Why do extra work?

 

[31550]

The investigation seems locked in to the time line of WT being alive at 9:30.But the camera clock can be manipulated. Is it 100% sure, without any doubt, that the photos were taken at 9:30. It would take some planning but not technically difficult.

Possible scenario: The battery could be removed and then time reset. Photos taken at FGM house. The time then being reset (immediately) for a second time back to Bali time. So when the camera is handed over to police it is back on Bali time and fits in with the photo of the TV show time.

The "actual" time was calculated and corrected for all the photos. Nobody thinks that the photos were taken at 7:30. You suggest that the IT forensic could not see previous clock changes on the camera. What is the other possible "data"? Or did they examine the camera and see it was 2 hours behind AEST and assume this was the case unchanged from when the camera was purchased in Bali. This was also backed up the "coincidental" photo of the TV showing AEST. Once decided, written down, locked in, and accepted by inquest no one goes back to review decisions. Why do extra work?

None of that makes any sense unless you can be clear about what you are trying to prove or disprove. Police have had the camera and photos for 9 years, and still don't have a case. It's strange that the camera was not handed over immediately. I think that is more important than the timestamps. The timestamp discrepancy confused many people but it doesn't implicate anybody in my opinion.

 

[LRitz]

None of that makes any sense unless you can be clear about what you are trying to prove or disprove. Police have had the camera and photos for 9 years, and still don't have a case. It's strange that the camera was not handed over immediately. I think that is more important than the timestamps. The timestamp discrepancy confused many people but it doesn't implicate anybody in my opinion.

If the clock on the camera was changed, and the photo time was not 9:30 but earlier, then FF's rock solid alibi, at the chemist filling out a prescription with his name on it and getting a receipt, falls to pieces. It leads me to think that there was planning by the both foster parents for the disappearance of WT weeks before. And, terrible to think, the FGM agreed to go along with the plan.

 

[Lady O]

None of that makes any sense unless you can be clear about what you are trying to prove or disprove. Police have had the camera and photos for 9 years, and still don't have a case. It's strange that the camera was not handed over immediately. I think that is more important than the timestamps. The timestamp discrepancy confused many people but it doesn't implicate anybody in my opinion.

Sometimes in cases, a thing can seem suspicious, but after intensive investigation, no one is able to establish any relevance or gain any more understanding of whether it is a clue or just a fact.

I think maybe with this one, the time was simply set wrong on the camera.

 

[31550]

If the clock on the camera was changed, and the photo time was not 9:30 but earlier, then FF's rock solid alibi, at the chemist filling out a prescription with his name on it and getting a receipt, falls to pieces. It leads me to think that there was planning by the both foster parents for the disappearance of WT weeks before. And, terrible to think, the FGM agreed to go along with the plan.

No it doesn't. The photos have nothing to do with the FF alibi, which is supported by other physical evidence. The FF has nothing to do with the photos or camera.

 

[DropBearess]

No it doesn't. The photos have nothing to do with the FF alibi, which is supported by other physical evidence. The FF has nothing to do with the photos or camera.

With all due respect, l don't know how you can say this. FF doesn't have a verifiable alibi before 8.40am. In fact, as far as l know, it's never been ascertained that he was actually driving his captured car at 8.40am and not someone else? Is there a clear photo of the driver? If not, how do we know he was driving and not FM? Or even FGM for that matter. None of them has a single, verifiable alibi before then. The photos have not, to date, been clearly identified by Forensics as true, correct and indisputable evidence. Until then, we can't poo-poo any theory at all. Let's not forget JS has made his living and subsequent opulent infallibility in IT.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

Manipulating Exif Data – Modifying and Deleting Metadata | ifolor

Exif data can help when working with images. We will show you how to read, edit or delete meta information.

www.ifolor.ch

Also read elsewhere where it said there isn't great forensic trail to assure detection. Have Taskforce assumed it to be correct because of BALI difference having been unable to forensically check it?

I'm an absolute novice when it comes to this area.. I did find this article interesting for the possibility EXIF data can be edited relatively easily. if the photos on the morning taken 7.39 using AEST not 9.37 assume

Steps

• On return from BALI you change clock back to AEST
• Photos taken 7 39 AEST
• Within next few days the EXIF is edited to say 9.37 relevant fields changed to suit
• Change the time clock again to correspond with the time difference consistent with edit

Would you not then have photos with the information you need to commit a deception and alibi? Surely if you can edit EXIF and alter your time clock at will you can create any outcome you want and use the camera clock setting to imply a 2hr difference when the time was always 7.39 but AEST

31550 is right. The delay in not choosing that obvious photo to hand in is a red flag. Perhaps not because there were other incriminating photos (though possible) but because they wanted time to make the edits including photo deletions etc necessary. It's always a red flag to me when the obvious choice isn't taken

 

[Angry Red Bull]

If that happened the clue to detect it would be the lack of photos from the time of return from BALI to the 12th. Why? Because they would have changed back to AEST immediately. They wouldn't edit EXIF for dozens of photos. They would just delete them. So you would have no photos in a two week period up to 12th. The absence of any may be conspicuous by their absence

 

[NRL Fan]

Sometimes in cases, a thing can seem suspicious, but after intensive investigation, no one is able to establish any relevance or gain any more understanding of whether it is a clue or just a fact.

I think maybe with this one, the time was simply set wrong on the camera.

If there was any manipulation of the time, it would have been changing the camera time from Bali to EST before handing it in to police. Claiming the camera was always left on Bali time then becomes the alibi. The only way to prove that the time had been changed would be to look at recent earlier pictures taken outside in the early morning or late afternoon and see if the natural light matches the time. I'm guessing that forensics would have checked this as part of the investigation.

 

[LRitz]

Sometimes in cases, a thing can seem suspicious, but after intensive investigation, no one is able to establish any relevance or gain any more understanding of whether it is a clue or just a fact.

I think maybe with this one, the time was simply set wrong on the camera.

But is it possible?

Maybe I am not explaining this well enough.

No one is saying the photo was taken at around 7:30 am. There is no "wrong" time just set to another time zone not AEST. Is it possible that the camera on the day WT disappeared was set one hour earlier than AEST. Then changed back to Bali time before being given to police. I do not know if this happened but is it possible and technically possible?

 

[LRitz]

If there was any manipulation of the time, it would have been changing the camera time from Bali to EST before handing it in to police. Claiming the camera was always left on Bali time then becomes the alibi. The only way to prove that the time had been changed would be to look at recent earlier pictures taken outside in the early morning or late afternoon and see if the natural light matches the time. I'm guessing that forensics would have checked this as part of the investigation.

Why the only way was changing to AEST?

Change the camera clock at 8:00 am. Take photos of WT around 8:30 when morning light is bright enough to look like 9:30. Then immediately change camera clock back to BALI time. When police examine camera it is on Bali time and they assume it has always been on Bali time, so they correct ALL photos by adding 2hours (or was it 118 minutes).
Any other photos before or after, or showing time on TV show, would all have been on Bali time so natural light would have been fine.

 

[31550]

Why the only way was changing to AEST?

Change the camera clock at 8:00 am. Take photos of WT around 8:30 when morning light is bright enough to look like 9:30. Then immediately change camera clock back to BALI time. When police examine camera it is on Bali time and they assume it has always been on Bali time, so they correct ALL photos by adding 2hours (or was it 118 minutes).
Any other photos before or after, or showing time on TV show, would all have been on Bali time so natural light would have been fine.

That's unnecessarily complicated. If you want to take photos at 8:30 to look like 9:30 you make sure the timestamps say 9:30 and then set the camera to correct time so there's no doubt. Why have the timestamps saying 7:30 and the clock set wrong? In any case, that time would not fit the rest of their alibis.

I find it hard to believe that nine years of forensic investigation has failed to discover this (supposed) evidence-tampering. Or that police have known about this evidence-tampering for several years but have not laid charges or even prepared a brief with such damning evidence. In the meantime they have fruitlessly pursued auction-rigging, unrelated assault / stalking, and lying to NSWCC charges. Why fiddle around with these unrelated offences when they (supposedly) have some direct evidence relating to William in Sep 2014?

 

[LRitz]

That's unnecessarily complicated. If you want to take photos at 8:30 to look like 9:30 you make sure the timestamps say 9:30 and then set the camera to correct time so there's no doubt. Why have the timestamps saying 7:30 and the clock set wrong? In any case, that time would not fit the rest of their alibis.

I find it hard to believe that nine years of forensic investigation has failed to discover this (supposed) evidence-tampering. Or that police have known about this evidence-tampering for several years but have not laid charges or even prepared a brief with such damning evidence. In the meantime they have fruitlessly pursued auction-rigging, unrelated assault / stalking, and lying to NSWCC charges. Why fiddle around with these unrelated offences when they (supposedly) have some direct evidence relating to William in Sep 2014?

Thinking this out. hmmm

Not really so complicated. Maybe because you do not want to alert the police to the fact that the camera clock is changed at all. The camera is on Bali time in Bali. The camera is on Bali time when photo of TV show is taken a couple of weeks before going to Kendall. The camera is on Bali time when police examine it. So everyone thinks it has always been on Bali time. At the time of the inquest more suspicion was on WT being abducted so this solution and time correction was accepted and not thought about again.

 

[31550]

Thinking this out. hmmm

Not really so complicated. Maybe because you do not want to alert the police to the fact that the camera clock is changed at all. The camera is on Bali time in Bali. The camera is on Bali time when photo of TV show is taken a couple of weeks before going to Kendall. The camera is on Bali time when police examine it. So everyone thinks it has always been on Bali time. At the time of the inquest more suspicion was on WT being abducted so this solution and time correction was accepted and not thought about again.

I am interested in how this theory would play out, then. What happened to William and when? This would be the greatest conspiracy ever perpetrated on the Australian public.

 

[Angry Red Bull]

I am interested in how this theory would play out, then. What happened to William and when? This would be the greatest conspiracy ever perpetrated on the Australian public.

No 31550. Virtually every perpetrator ( I'm not saying they are) has a story to tell which hides culpability. This one would entail using edited EXIF data on images and camera settings to create a different timeline proof of life. That's all. If it happened it hid the time when WT was really taken away post death.

I always maintain that disappearance 10.20 gives an inadequate time window to do all that's needed. It also ends up being a time to police call which is much shorter that average for these missing cases.. Why not call police early on 30 min when you've already hidden the body earlier. It strengthens the illusion you are seeking to make. That was the purpose though to convince everyone that it was abduction and not concealment of a body. There are a great many things red flags appealing with the earlier time.

 

[LRitz]

I am interested in how this theory would play out, then. What happened to William and when? This would be the greatest conspiracy ever perpetrated on the Australian public.

I don't want to start a guessing game. Did FM have a second phone???.... etc etc. Lots of possibilities but no evidence.

I am not familiar with the timeline of when FF left the house. But I think if photo was at 9:37 FF may have still have been at the house.
FF leaves, and then as FGM state - three have breakfast. I know she was elderly and it was just a slip....

 

[31550]

No 31550. Virtually every perpetrator ( I'm not saying they are) has a story to tell which hides culpability. This one would entail using edited EXIF data on images and camera settings to create a different timeline proof of life. That's all. If it happened it hid the time when WT was really taken away post death.

I always maintain that disappearance 10.20 gives an inadequate time window to do all that's needed. It also ends up being a time to police call which is much shorter that average for these missing cases.. Why not call police early on 30 min when you've already hidden the body earlier. It strengthens the illusion you are seeking to make. That was the purpose though to convince everyone that it was abduction and not concealment of a body. There are a great many things red flags appealing with the earlier time.

Editing EXIF data in a case of the disappearance (presumed death) of a 3YO boy is an extremely serious crime. I am saying that if this has happened, or was even suspected by police, then a thorough investigation must have taken place by now, and charges would be laid if proof was found. The appearances at the NSWCC would have provided excellent opportunities to further ask questions about the camera and photographs, if deemed relevant by SFR. None of this has happened. No charges relating to the camera or photos.

Further, one still needs a working theory as to what happened to William, ignoring the photo evidence but consistent with all the other evidence. One can't just say that 'The EXIF data MIGHT have been edited, therefore the murderer must be X'. The questions of who, when, how, where must still be addressed.

I personally don't believe the disappearance time of 10:20. I believe William was removed from the property reasonably soon after the 9:37 photographs were taken. I further think that it's POSSIBLE one or more photographs were taken after 9:37 which would have provided some clue as to exactly what happened to him. I think that possibly these photos were deleted before the camera was handed over, and this explains the delay in handing the camera to police. Deletion of data from an SD card MAY be performed in such a way that precludes detection (data can't be recovered). It would still require some technical expertise. E.g. delete the 'unwanted' photos, then copy all the 'good' photos to a different, empty SD card. You can't just 'delete' the photos from the camera menu - good forensics would be able to recover the deleted data.

The time between 9:37 and 10:50 provides enough opportunity for something to happen to William, his body to be removed from the property to a nearby location, concealed, and for certain parties to be back at the property when the 000 call is placed. But FF has physical evidence which would exclude him from taking part in most, if not all of this activity. This leaves only FM, FGM, William's sister and possibly an unknown, unnamed person as possible active participants.

 

[gymjam]

Respectfully and IMO the corrected times of the 5 photos has everything to do with providing an alibi for the FF. The corrected times of the 5 photos supports the alibi that he wasn't present when the 5 photos were taken. But this little snippet from Ally Chumley's book Searching for Spiderman (kindle page 72) it seems FF was present at 48 Benaroon Drive at 7.50 which is just 10 minutes after the last created time (rounded up to 7.40) of the 5th photo. It seems Chumley had access to various signed statements made by FF and FM. Interesting to me that FF never mentioned showing his new car to FM's mother or that the children had showed her their new bikes either when he (the FF) made his 1st statement. I understand from media reporting of the early inquest tranche that the 1st statement of the FF ma not have been provided to the coroner by police and from memory it was Jubelin who provided the brief to the coroner in about June 2018 just prior to the big search that he organized for the coroner.

The most pertinent couple of questions to me is: Why would FF require an alibi? Was there an accident whist FF showed the car to FF's mother?

No it doesn't. The photos have nothing to do with the FF alibi, which is supported by other physical evidence. The FF has nothing to do with the photos or camera.

 

[31550]

Respectfully and IMO the corrected times of the 5 photos has everything to do with providing an alibi for the FF. The corrected times of the 5 photos supports the alibi that he wasn't present when the 5 photos were taken. But this little snippet from Ally Chumley's book Searching for Spiderman (kindle page 72) it seems FF was present at 48 Benaroon Drive at 7.50 which is just 10 minutes after the last created time (rounded up to 7.40) of the 5th photo. It seems Chumley had access to various signed statements made by FF and FM. Interesting to me that FF never mentioned showing his new car to FM's mother or that the children had showed her their new bikes either when he (the FF) made his 1st statement. I understand from media reporting of the early inquest tranche that the 1st statement of the FF ma not have been provided to the coroner by police and from memory it was Jubelin who provided the brief to the coroner in about June 2018 just prior to the big search that he organized for the coroner.

The most pertinent couple of questions to me is: Why would FF require an alibi? Was there an accident whist FF showed the car to FF's mother?

View attachment 1849113

As I have said all along if police could prove that the photos were actually taken at a real time of 7:39 and not 9:37 then all bets are off, clearly the fosters are both deliberately lying and the case should be a slam dunk for the police. I don't believe they can.

As far as I can tell there is no physical evidence that the bike riding or showing bikes ever took place, and it's difficult to fit these events into the timeline. Why invent the bike riding? For one, it might explain the damage to the garden bed (if police had ever noticed it). Further, it provides credence to the story that FM saw cars in the street. But I don't see how this would fit the timeline (regardless of when the photos were taken) .

 

[gymjam]

It would be very interesting to know if any further photographs were taken after the return from Bali on 2 August.

The 1 September was when the Sunrise program news grab with time displayed, appeared in the background of a photograph taken by either FF or FM. As it happened from 1st to 5th (inclusive) of September 2014 Sunrise was on a USA road-trip and on the 1st the program was taped live in Los Angeles and broadcast in Australia from 6am NSW time, instead of the usual 5.30am time. I think the police need to release the photo that was taken on 1 September 2014 or if not the photo, at least the time that was displayed on the (broadcasted) Sunrise program. LA was in daylight saving mode therefore 19 hours behind NSW 'normal' (EST) time. I also think police need to advise if they checked to see if the Sunrise program background footage was actually that which was broadcast on 1/9/2014. At the time - from August 2014 to end of September, Sunrise had a Cash Cow promo running. Snippets of the Sunrise USA roadtrip show the Cash Cow costume in the background.

Someone was uploading photos to the FF's instagram site on 31 August 2014 which included photos from Bali and a trip FF had done to Byrock which looked like a lads' dirt-bikie weekend away. Did FF also go to Bali?

Edit: hangabout re the time difference between LA and Sydney of 19 hours. I always get confused with time differences from o/s countries lol. Would this mean the Sunrise show that was broadcast on 1st in Australia/NSW from 6am instead of starting at the normal time of 5.30am on Monday 1st, was taped on Sunday 31st August 2014 in LA USA?

YEP I am correct it was taped on 31st August 2014 to be broadcast to Australia on 1/9/2014

Sunrise USA Road Trip

 

[LRitz]

Editing EXIF data in a case of the disappearance (presumed death) of a 3YO boy is an extremely serious crime. I am saying that if this has happened, or was even suspected by police, then a thorough investigation must have taken place by now, and charges would be laid if proof was found. The appearances at the NSWCC would have provided excellent opportunities to further ask questions about the camera and photographs, if deemed relevant by SFR. None of this has happened. No charges relating to the camera or photos.

Further, one still needs a working theory as to what happened to William, ignoring the photo evidence but consistent with all the other evidence. One can't just say that 'The EXIF data MIGHT have been edited, therefore the murderer must be X'. The questions of who, when, how, where must still be addressed.

I personally don't believe the disappearance time of 10:20. I believe William was removed from the property reasonably soon after the 9:37 photographs were taken. I further think that it's POSSIBLE one or more photographs were taken after 9:37 which would have provided some clue as to exactly what happened to him. I think that possibly these photos were deleted before the camera was handed over, and this explains the delay in handing the camera to police. Deletion of data from an SD card MAY be performed in such a way that precludes detection (data can't be recovered). It would still require some technical expertise. E.g. delete the 'unwanted' photos, then copy all the 'good' photos to a different, empty SD card. You can't just 'delete' the photos from the camera menu - good forensics would be able to recover the deleted data.

The time between 9:37 and 10:50 provides enough opportunity for something to happen to William, his body to be removed from the property to a nearby location, concealed, and for certain parties to be back at the property when the 000 call is placed. But FF has physical evidence which would exclude him from taking part in most, if not all of this activity. This leaves only FM, FGM, William's sister and possibly an unknown, unnamed person as possible active participants.

The possible deletion of data and new SD card would have to be done before the police arrived. Would there be enough time? The FF and FM would have to be prepared that there would be an immediate and thorough search of the house which would find the camera. The first SD card would have to be hidden, destroyed or thrown out of a car window around the corner.

The house, vehicles and surrounds were not treated as a crime scene. Attention was on search for WT. So vital evidence was lost that may either have helped the defence of FF and FM or solved the mystery. we may never know what happened to WT.

 

[gymjam]

As I have said all along if police could prove that the photos were actually taken at a real time of 7:39 and not 9:37 then all bets are off, clearly the fosters are both deliberately lying and the case should be a slam dunk for the police. I don't believe they can.

As far as I can tell there is no physical evidence that the bike riding or showing bikes ever took place, and it's difficult to fit these events into the timeline. Why invent the bike riding? For one, it might explain the damage to the garden bed (if police had ever noticed it). Further, it provides credence to the story that FM saw cars in the street. But I don't see how this would fit the timeline (regardless of when the photos were taken) .

if the car showing to grannie and bike 'showing' by the children was done whilst FF was still at 48 Benaroon, must have been done at the time of 7.50ish that FM alluded to, also puts her own (FM) timeline re her mother out as well. So did she put the FF as being present where an accident may have occurred for a reason? If the accident that caused injury to William that may have caused his death, then there was a lot more extra time available for either FF or FM to dispose of William's body? I calculate FF would have ensured he drove past the Kendall tennis club's cctv camera at 8.40, which would mean he left 48 Benaroon at 8.37 which is 57 minutes after 7.50.

It is my understanding that all 5 photographs were provided to police during the afternoon of 12th and FF discusses the 5th photo with police during his 1st interview on the 14th - discussing whether William was wearing shoes and he pointed out that William was not wearing shoes in the photos. Forensic examination of the camera and the subsequent X-ways reportr was done on the 19th which is the day that the family returned to Sydney; full forensic examination of 48 Benaroon was also done on 19th.

The time difference between each of the 5 created photos vs the corrected times is 1 hour, 57 minutes, 50 seconds.

 

[gymjam]

As I have said all along if police could prove that the photos were actually taken at a real time of 7:39 and not 9:37 then all bets are off, clearly the fosters are both deliberately lying and the case should be a slam dunk for the police. I don't believe they can.

As far as I can tell there is no physical evidence that the bike riding or showing bikes ever took place, and it's difficult to fit these events into the timeline. Why invent the bike riding? For one, it might explain the damage to the garden bed (if police had ever noticed it). Further, it provides credence to the story that FM saw cars in the street. But I don't see how this would fit the timeline (regardless of when the photos were taken) .

If there is evidence that FF was present with the 5 photos were created, what would this then mean to the case? Why would FF and FM remove FF from the scene when the 5 photos were created by changing the timeline to be 2-hours forward, and in removing FF from the scene at 48 Benaroon, FM has placed herself well and truly in the picture - or is FF the one that controlled the narrative for 12th? He certainly appears to have controlled the narrative relative to the 11th. IMO it means he has proof that he was elsewhere when the 5 photos were created between 7:38 - 7:40 (rounded up) and at the times of the corrected times 9:36 to o9:38 (rounded up).

If the family had traveled to Kendall (as per alleged prior arrangement) what time would they have departed Sydney and what time would they have (arranged) to be present in Kendall? IMO the corrected times of the 5 photos would fit for travel on 12th departing Sydney at around 5.30am allowing for 4-hours driving, for travel on 11th the created times being close to 2-hours earlier would fit.

 

[31550]

The possible deletion of data and new SD card would have to be done before the police arrived. Would there be enough time? The FF and FM would have to be prepared that there would be an immediate and thorough search of the house which would find the camera. The first SD card would have to be hidden, destroyed or thrown out of a car window around the corner.

The house, vehicles and surrounds were not treated as a crime scene. Attention was on search for WT. So vital evidence was lost that may either have helped the defence of FF and FM or solved the mystery. we may never know what happened to WT.

I think plenty of time. The camera and spiderman photos were not handed to police on the day William disappeared. The photo released by police to the media on that day was a completely different one, taken days or weeks earlier. This indicates to me a significant delay before police had access to the Spiderman pics. If it was known that William was wearing a Spiderman suit when he disappeared, and that very recent pictures of him existed in that suit, why not use those pictures into the media? Clearly, the camera was not provided to police immediately and police were not aware of the Spiderman photos immediately or they would have asked for them.