Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #18

[Puggle]

There is no way the police would leave a kidnapped child with their kidnappers, no matter how "safe" they might be, just to catch some pedophiles. The health and safety of William would be the number one concern over anything else and he is not safe with someone who kidnapped him. Even children kidnapped by their own parents in custody issues and where there is no intent by that parent to kill the child are immediately removed as soon as they are found. It just wouldn't happen. Can you imagine if they left him with someone they thought was safe and then something happened to him? The police would be in mega deep doodoo.

The only way that strategy would be used is if they actually knew he was already dead, because they have nothing to lose.

Exactly...thats why I said I couldn't see that scenario working...I thought it obvious. ..but just addressing the posts specific scenario RE: FM and FF.....

 

[Puggle]

Great post Puggle, thank you. One thing to bear in mind is that if the police believe or have information that William is alive, they would be busting down doors to get him. Their first priority in this case is William and his safety. They wouldn't hold off so that they can catch a few pedophiles who may be involved.

If the police believe or have information that William is deceased then they may use strategy to round up and arrest anyone and everyone involved.

Agreed. ...That's why I put in the.."Where to from here and with who"...

I suppose I am suggesting he has been moved...and this is where the investigation is at.....he may have been moved around...and police aren't sure who has him...

I recall they were excited to think another POI was in the company of William in QLD...they were organizing a raid...only to be disappointed when it turned out not to be William..

 

[tracecomp]

Furthering a train of thought of scenarios .....trying to understand the investigation.

I'm going to have to go with what the police have essentially been telling us is the truth or at least the version of the truth we are allowed to know so far.

I try to forget the media spin on some things (cause we know they get it wrong)....but taking the generalised story that police have played out.

Someone that either lives in Benaroon, was visiting Benaroon or had reason to be working legit or otherwise in Benaroon ..... stumbled across William and took that opportunity to snatch him.

The Key POI's that the police have so far given us are Bill Spedding and Tony Jones

Bill Spedding and Tony Jones Know each other, they used to be neighbours back in Wellington.
Did they have further contact since both moving closer to the Haven area? - that is exactly what police are suggesting...through an association of a breakaway Grandparents support group....and it was more than hinted...they suspected some paedophilic behaviour amongst some of those members....Two of which have now been proven in a court of Law to have indeed been paedophiles.

Could it even be conceivable that Tony Jones after being kicked out of his family home asked Bill for some accommodation between the time of being kicked out until his court appearance on the 27th September 2014 - where he pleaded guilty. (Maybe his office - Hence a single mattress).

Now we know Tony Jones is thief ... is it possible that this was another mutual interest between the two.....Tony - Steals .... Bill (Illegally - in the past) had resold stolen items through his former Pawn Broking business???..... That would have been a mutually agreeable situation ???.

Having already been to Benaroon to inspect the washing machine did Bill think of his mate when he drove into this very quiet street??... Did he mention to Nana what a lovely area she lived in and strike up a conversation. Could Nana have mentioned about her neighbours being away??..Did Bill notice that apart from Nana's house...there would only be one other neighbour that would be afforded a view onto the home that was empty.

I can visualise a scenario where Tony has been told by Bill of the house where some people are away on holidays....I can see the possibility of Tony and another acquaintance having gone to Benaroon to scope out the area/case the house and surroundings....or even just flat out Rob it that day.

What part Bill played that exact day ??? ....

I can also see (although sickening) a paedophile and well seasoned criminal that is out on Bail...taking an opportunity when it presents itself ....he after all has been deprived his source of paedophilic pleasure. Going by his 90 plus wrap sheet ...one can only assume he is the type to take and do whatever he pleases whenever he pleases.

Was Bill there??? I still can't figure that out....but did he know something was going to be happening in Benaroon Drive that morning?? ....he did IMO

If he was there ..... good reason for him to not admit it.

If he wasn't there... what could stop him from telling what he did know ....blackmail/intimidation??

If Tony had been staying at Bills office (didn't Bill visit his office that morning??) No need for phone conversations if people are meeting in person - would be no need for phone contact during the time at Benaroon if they Travelled together or followed each other in seperate vehicles.

If one or the other or even another accomplice took William was he taken Back to the Office??
Would it be possible at that time of day (morning) to hide and take him upstairs to the office??
Is there back stair access off the main street to the office??

If he was held in the office is it possible that when Tony Knew he'd have to front court on the 27th, that he then somehow made arrangements with a couple (at a caravan park) to then take William - Hence the Caravan Park being searched following reports of a child crying from the 28th of September till ? 9th October.

Where to from there and with whom??

How does the Bush search fit into this scenario?

Detractors: If they found any forensic evidence of William being in the office or anyone of the vehicles so far searched, surely that person would have been arrested by now?
Would a paedophile with known attraction to girls, take a boy?

Questions: Arrested for what? forensic evidence to what? What is proven apart from William having been in a car or the office...... certainly damaging...and probably adequate to build a circumstantial case.... but does it prove what has happened to William or where he is?? Is it possible that a paedophile with known attraction to girls possibly have preference to both sexes? or could it also be possible they see the child as a commodity to be traded with likeminded individuals in order to acquire access to their preference through favours?

Police Focus: If their main goal is to find William...to find out what has happened to him, would it not be logical for them to keep all their options open for as long as they can to achieve their ultimate goal/focus ?? .... hence my previous analogy of why bust the single drug dealer ...when you can bust the whole operation.

I think I did find evidence a few weeks back that Police do have the discretional powers of when to charge someone (at a time that suits them - and furthers the investigators) and that makes perfect sense to me.... I think that can also be seen in the fact that police only decided to charge Bill with the historical sex claims in April even though they were aware of the allegations as far back as January...

Sorry for the long ramble .... I needed an excuse to sit down for a bit.... feel free to pick apart..

BBM - I can certainly believe that nanna mentioned to BS that she needed the machine fixed asap because her grandchildren were coming for a visit (and little kids are messy) and also mentioning that she would normally ask a neighbour to use their washing machine, but explained that one neighbour was away on holidays and the other across the road was vacant and for sale. I agree potential robbery or child abduction could be a motive for TJ and BS to "case" the street and when the offender saw William alone took advantage.

 

[Davita]

BBM - I can certainly believe that nanna mentioned to BS that she needed the machine fixed asap because her grandchildren were coming for a visit (and little kids are messy) and also mentioning that she would normally ask a neighbour to use their washing machine, but explained that one neighbour was away on holidays and the other across the road was vacant and for sale. I agree potential robbery or child abduction could be a motive for TJ and BS to "case" the street and when the offender saw William alone took advantage.

"It was also revealed at the time that Spedding had claimed to relatives that William’s grandmother told him she was expecting a visit from the child and his family later in the week and needed her washing machine fixed in *anticipation."

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...520959271?sv=3f0507eeadff1f859924aa6973969670

 

[Eloise]

Puggle, sorry I was using your post because I agreed with it. A jumping off point so to speak. Your meaning is clear.

police absolutely do have discretion when it comes to making arrests, but they wouldn't put a child's life at risk just to arrest a couple of pedos. They either don't know where he is or they know he is dead. I am 100% confident no cop in the NSW Poilce Force would allow a defenceless child live with any kidnapper just to bring down a pedo ring on a tangent. There is precedent for them letting a teen live with a suspect because they didn't want that suspect to know he was a suspect (the Lin murders in Sydney) but she was a teen, the situation was under surveillance, and they didn't believe she was ever a target of the accused. I think an abducted four year old is different.

eta: they might know or suspect who took him but not have evidence of where he ended up, or even have evidence of that but still can't locate him.

 

[Samantha10]

Why has no one come forward via MSM to confirm or deny that Bill & Margaret Spedding were at the school play that morning?

 

[Puggle]

Puggle, sorry I was using your post because I agreed with it. A jumping off point so to speak. Your meaning is clear.

police absolutely do have discretion when it comes to making arrests, but they wouldn't put a child's life at risk just to arrest a couple of pedos. They either don't know where he is or they know he is dead. I am 100% confident no cop in the NSW Poilce Force would allow a defenceless child live with any kidnapper just to bring down a pedo ring on a tangent. There is precedent for them letting a teen live with a suspect because they didn't want that suspect to know he was a suspect (the Lin murders in Sydney) but she was a teen, the situation was under surveillance, and they didn't believe she was ever a target of the accused. I think an abducted four year old is different.

eta: they might know or suspect who took him but not have evidence of where he ended up, or even have evidence of that but still can't locate him.

Ohh...ok...cool... sorry my misunderstanding..

Didn't know about the Lin case...thx...will look that one up.

Yes I am truly of the belief that If I am reading the investigation correctly.... then it is more a case of them not having solid evidence pointing to William being deceased..... and with that in mind they are investigating the possibility that he has been passed on to someone else.... they obviously had someone in QLD as a POI...how many others they have is anyone's guess...

I do hope that if that is the case ... that he is with someone who through association (criminal) is at least not a paedophile ... and that person/s eventually come to their senses..

I know Jubelin said a reward isn't at this point part of their strategy .... But can't help wonder if an immunity deal for someone on the periphery of the crime wouldn't help....it's been a YEAR NOW...

 

[Puggle]

Why has no one come forward via MSM to confirm or deny that Bill & Margaret Spedding were at the school play that morning?

Simple answer ....we don't know.

Would be nice to have confirmation from someone else other than Colin though.....

 

[Eloise]

Yes, my money is on him being quickly passed on. If they are his abductors, Spedding, Jones et al might not even know where he ultimately ended up? I don't think anyone in the local area still has him, though at the same time sometimes abducted kids have been 'hidden in plain sight' (see the Shawn Hornbeck case).

 

[richieswan]

Ohh...ok...cool... sorry my misunderstanding..

Didn't know about the Lin case...thx...will look that one up.

Yes I am truly of the belief that If I am reading the investigation correctly.... then it is more a case of them not having solid evidence pointing to William being deceased..... and with that in mind they are investigating the possibility that he has been passed on to someone else.... they obviously had someone in QLD as a POI...how many others they have is anyone's guess...

I do hope that if that is the case ... that he is with someone who through association (criminal) is at least not a paedophile ... and that person/s eventually come to their senses..

I know Jubelin said a reward isn't at this point part of their strategy .... But can't help wonder if an immunity deal for someone on the periphery of the crime wouldn't help....it's been a YEAR NOW...

BBM: I just had another listen to the interview with Clive Small about WT. He mentions how police use media releases to aid their investigation, or to reassure public safety. He brushes on deals with people (crims, informants) to share info etc.
https://m.soundcloud.com/daily-tele...-4ArQC?in=daily-telegraph/sets/william-tyrell

I totally get the feeling the media and public are a tool to LE. They know the end game and exactly when it's time to unsheath, sharpen, work and refuel. So glad Jubes has the gloves on.

 

[Makara]

Why has no one come forward via MSM to confirm or deny that Bill & Margaret Spedding were at the school play that morning?

Welcome Samantha10. It could be a simple case of these people being interviewed by police and they are not at liberty to discuss it any further.

 

[Samantha10]

We know that Bill got his coffee at 10am (well according to Colin) but he had plenty of time to drive to Benaroon Dr. for 10.30am. What is important is the School awards/play (?)......I am confused why the MSM did not pursue this from an investigative journalism point of view.

This was answered by Makara.

 

[bearbear]

regarding a reward not offered, do police offer a reward for information if the victim is deceased?

 

[Puggle]

regarding a reward not offered, do police offer a reward for information if the victim is deceased?

Not sure Bear.....but most of the rewards I have seen have been applied to "Cold Cases" .....would have to research to be sure.

 

[Puggle]

Regardless of reward or even immunity from prosecution.....the first thing that needs to be done is for NSW police to fix up their crime stopper page!!! so people can actually report something as a suspicious.

As it stands the page is set up asking for specific information on a specific person for a specific crime - there's no leeway for someone to simply put in a report (as Police have asked) on a suspicion of someone due to x behaviour or y - they did this (and it was out of character).

Their page is a very "user" unfriendly site!!

It doesn't even have a "Kidnapping" section ....

I would feel more confident passing on information via the South Australian Crime Stopper Website (very user friendly) and having them send info to their NSW's counterparts...

Makes me mad!!!

 

[Makara]

MOD ALERT: Please take note. If you see that your post has been moderated with a <modsnip> it is done for a reason. That reason is posted in the Reason For Edit box at the bottom of the post. If you choose to circumvent that moderation by removing the inserted <modsnip> and replacing it with your own text again you will immediately receive a time-out and your account will be placed under review and this may ultimately result in a total ban from Websleuths.

If you have a problem with moderation you can contact me privately via private message or use the Alert tab (small black triangle on the bottom left of the message box).

 

[fizzypop]

regarding a reward not offered, do police offer a reward for information if the victim is deceased?

Here they will offer rewards for information leading to a conviction even if the victim is dead. So don't take the not offering a reward as a bad sign if that's what you were thinking. Not trying to put words in your fingers (lol) but just in case. I think they are saying a reward is not appropriate yet is that they still have angles they are working on we might not know about or they are still getting enough tips (especially since the 60 Min. show) that they don't need to resort to that yet. Personally I think rewards are a last resort to give people who are not talking an incentive, and I'm guessing they still have plenty to go on. Even though he's been missing a long time, I don't think things have dried up enough to offer up a reward to open up some mouths. I actually took that comment as an encouraging sign.

 

[MsDee]

Why has no one come forward via MSM to confirm or deny that Bill & Margaret Spedding were at the school play that morning?

Welcome Samantha10. It could be a simple case of these people being interviewed by police and they are not at liberty to discuss it any further.

As has already been discussed in past threads, the amount of media blackout in this case is huge, and the level of co-operation between MSM & LE has never been seen in any other case in Australia. We surmised it is for the protection of the FF, were even told as much, and fair enough too.

But why haven't MSM rounded up every Tom, Dick and Harry from the town who may have something to say about it - parents from the school, people from the cafe, other customers of the repairman, people who were walking down the street. It is what they normally do - they just love getting that scoop, accompanied by the "breaking news/eyewitness talks/newsflash/exclusive/you saw it here first folks" 30 second news byte to entice TV watchers in.

Now I believe, and I could be wrong here, that if people have just been spoken to at large, without being formally ID'ed as witnesses, with official statements taken as such, then it is pretty much free reign. They can't be ordered, legally, by police, to not talk, but they can be asked not to. Which is why we often see minor players in stories being interviewed on TV. But where are they in this case? They are individuals, each with their own beliefs and moral codes - there are always those who just love to be at the centre of the universe. Not all of them can be controlled all the time.

MSM as an entity is far easier to control than a bunch of individuals. The question is why?

MSM reported the neighbours interviews in the early days, then it all just stopped. What have we seen since then? What haven't we seen? At what point did that MSM stream stop? They are rhetorical questions.

Here's another one to ask ourselves. If the blackout in the early days was to protect the FF, as we were told, and fair enough too, then who, or more importantly, what information, are they now protecting by not reporting on everything else? What else is at play here, and why?

Sleuthing this case is like playing solitaire with cards missing. But when you stop and ask yourself those rhetorical questions, there are only a few logical conclusions to arrive at.

 

[louisepiglet]

As has already been discussed in past threads, the amount of media blackout in this case is huge, and the level of co-operation between MSM & LE has never been seen in any other case in Australia. We surmised it is for the protection of the FF, were even told as much, and fair enough too.

But why haven't MSM rounded up every Tom, Dick and Harry from the town who may have something to say about it - parents from the school, people from the cafe, other customers of the repairman, people who were walking down the street. It is what they normally do - they just love getting that scoop, accompanied by the "breaking news/eyewitness talks/newsflash/exclusive/you saw it here first folks" 30 second news byte to entice TV watchers in.

Now I believe, and I could be wrong here, that if people have just been spoken to at large, without being formally ID'ed as witnesses, with official statements taken as such, then it is pretty much free reign. They can't be ordered, legally, by police, to not talk, but they can be asked not to. Which is why we often see minor players in stories being interviewed on TV. But where are they in this case? They are individuals, each with their own beliefs and moral codes - there are always those who just love to be at the centre of the universe. Not all of them can be controlled all the time.

MSM as an entity is far easier to control than a bunch of individuals. The question is why?

MSM reported the neighbours interviews in the early days, then it all just stopped. What have we seen since then? What haven't we seen? At what point did that MSM stream stop? They are rhetorical questions.

Here's another one to ask ourselves. If the blackout in the early days was to protect the FF, as we were told, and fair enough too, then who, or more importantly, what information, are they now protecting by not reporting on everything else? What else is at play here, and why?

Sleuthing this case is like playing solitaire with cards missing. But when you stop and ask yourself those rhetorical questions, there are only a few logical conclusions to arrive at.

Great post. IMO there is something unusual going on here.

 

[Davita]

Great post. IMO there is something unusual going on here.

In my opinion everything went quiet because Investigators have what they need. No more info is needed. The same happened in the Kiesha Abrahams case. They suspected that the mother of Kiesha killed her and they were right. Up until the point Kristi gave a confession to an undercover police officer, no further news were forthcoming. They however did not arrest Kristi, even with her confession, they waited and followed her and her de facto partner till they led police to where Kiesha was buried.

It might be the same in this case. I am sure if the police needed more information, the media would be involved 24/7. Since the car was taken, all news came to a halt.