Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, NSW, 12 Sept 2014 - #21

Status
Not open for further replies.
I take your point. If BS charges were for a current and not historic crime, I don't think he would have made bail. In this instance when all his circumstances were taken into consideration at the bail appeal hearing, it seemed reasonable to grant him bail. He was granted bail in a higher court than the local court that would not grant him bail. His case is now proceeding back through the local court. However, the type of crimes he is charged with, he would be reporting to police 3 times a week at least for the rest of his life if he ever got parole. My understanding is that when dealing with the local court, it is way more punitive than the levels above it. MOO
 
If BS has little or no work, that might have something to do with the reporting requirements. The court may consider that there's no particular hardship in thrice weekly reporting; what else has he got to do?
 
It is very interesting to note that the bail conditions of reporting 3 times a week and having to live at Lake Cathie still stick on a case which is so many years old. If BS has been squeaky clean until now then why (and Im saying this based on how other cases have been managed, Im not diminishing in any way the nature of the charges) does he still have to report three times a week?? I would think if he is still a POI then there would be a big push to keep him very much where they could see him. I still feel these historic charges could be being used as an aid to the WT investigation more than any other purpose.

Yes ... back in September 2015 when the bail conditions were relaxed to reporting to police 3 times a week the magistrate was reassured by the fact that police handling the case were not opposed to the application to ease BS bail conditions and thus they were varied.
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/ne...e/news-story/760bb3ecdd22ec14247f91792c35ff74

April 2016
Magistrate denied the appeal because BS was still facing "serious" charges.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/new...d/news-story/d9919ffc3d0c94cfb4fde386bde8b760
 
Does anyone know what happens when you report to police on bail? Is it just, here I am, mark me down, I haven't left the country--or do you have to answer questions about what you've been doing and who you've seen?
 
Does anyone know what happens when you report to police on bail? Is it just, here I am, mark me down, I haven't left the country--or do you have to answer questions about what you've been doing and who you've seen?

I've waited in police stations before (reporting thefts) and watched people coming in for their routine 'reporting to Police'. They wave and say their name, and the officer nods in reply. All over. Not sure if that applies to everyone.
 
Seems that we protect the wrong people. Time we started to care more for our innocent young kids.
And WHY is this man not still in jail????

Derek Nichols lived near a school as well [emoji35]

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
 
Seems that we protect the wrong people. Time we started to care more for our innocent young kids.

Sometimes I think that there is a below-surface attitude of “well, at least the child wasn’t killed” when they make laws and precedence for the sentencing of pedophiles. We need to demand more from our law makers, in this regard.


I think we also have problems with some who are responsible for sentencing. An example is this Aussie judge who, last year, was banned from hearing criminal cases, due to his seemingly lax attitude about child rape and incest.


"Federal Senator Bill Heffernan, who was responsible for referring Judge Neilson to the commission, said the case demonstrated the need for the judiciary to be included in the investigation now being conducted by the Royal Commission into child sexual abuse."

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-judic...hould-not-hear-sex-cases-20150924-gjubld.html
 
He isn't still in prison because he has served the sentence given to him.
I can imagine it's difficult to find accommodation given his status as an ex prisoner and a pedophile, no work history. Would you rent to him?
As well as it might be hard to find a suburb that doesn't have a school in it. As I read it, the school is a dance school, parents would take the children there and pick them up as well, wouldn't they?
I don't know the answer but my only thoughts are, a gated community where only the pedophiles can live, no children, no freedom to roam, they gave up their rights when they committed the crime.
HOWEVER, they have to live somewhere, at least he admits to his possibility of reoffending, as much as it disgusts me to read it.
And WHY is this man not still in jail????

Derek Nichols lived near a school as well [emoji35]

Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
 
He isn't still in prison because he has served the sentence given to him.
I can imagine it's difficult to find accommodation given his status as an ex prisoner and a pedophile, no work history. Would you rent to him?
As well as it might be hard to find a suburb that doesn't have a school in it. As I read it, the school is a dance school, parents would take the children there and pick them up as well, wouldn't they?
I don't know the answer but my only thoughts are, a gated community where only the pedophiles can live, no children, no freedom to roam, they gave up their rights when they committed the crime.
HOWEVER, they have to live somewhere, at least he admits to his possibility of reoffending, as much as it disgusts me to read it.

What I'm trying to get at is that the sentences are way to short. These pieces of filth are thrown right back into society where so many must go back and repeat the crime and hurt our innocent children. These's hardly a public registry in Australia where people can be aware that these people are living on their street, or in this case near a school. Why? I just wish Australian laws regarding paedophiles were like they are here in the states. It absolutely infuriates me :(



Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk
 
Seems that we protect the wrong people. Time we started to care more for our innocent young kids.

I totally agree with you.

Sometimes I think that there is a below-surface attitude of “well, at least the child wasn’t killed” when they make laws and precedence for the sentencing of pedophiles. We need to demand more from our law makers, in this regard.


I think we also have problems with some who are responsible for sentencing. An example is this Aussie judge who, last year, was banned from hearing criminal cases, due to his seemingly lax attitude about child rape and incest.


"Federal Senator Bill Heffernan, who was responsible for referring Judge Neilson to the commission, said the case demonstrated the need for the judiciary to be included in the investigation now being conducted by the Royal Commission into child sexual abuse."

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-judic...hould-not-hear-sex-cases-20150924-gjubld.html

You're right people have no idea of the psychological damage (as well as physical) done to a child who is sexually or non-sexually abused from a young age it is very serious and should be treated as such by the authorities and courts.

What I'm trying to get at is that the sentences are way to short. These pieces of filth are thrown right back into society where so many must go back and repeat the crime and hurt our innocent children. These's hardly a public registry in Australia where people can be aware that these people are living on their street, or in this case near a school. Why? I just wish Australian laws regarding paedophiles were like they are here in the states. It absolutely infuriates me :(



Sent from my Nexus 6 using Tapatalk

It makes me very angry at how short the sentences are in Australia I just don't understand it. Thankfully they have kept Daniel Morcombe's killer behind bars indefinitely but other sentences in cases are a disgrace. I think if you attack a child you should be chemically castrated and jailed for life to protect children etc in society no matter what country the abuse happens in.

Off topic The trials of the drug normally used to treat cancer on paedophiles in Sweden are interesting the drug reduces sex drive significantly and it is intended to reduce the risk of the paedophile offending.
 
Sometimes I think that there is a below-surface attitude of “well, at least the child wasn’t killed” when they make laws and precedence for the sentencing of pedophiles. We need to demand more from our law makers, in this regard.


I think we also have problems with some who are responsible for sentencing. An example is this Aussie judge who, last year, was banned from hearing criminal cases, due to his seemingly lax attitude about child rape and incest.


"Federal Senator Bill Heffernan, who was responsible for referring Judge Neilson to the commission, said the case demonstrated the need for the judiciary to be included in the investigation now being conducted by the Royal Commission into child sexual abuse."

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/nsw-judic...hould-not-hear-sex-cases-20150924-gjubld.html

BBM

As it did in the Wood Royal Commission in the late 90s when they investigated the possibility of collusion in the ranks regarding paedophilia and the legal profession, the media, the police force, politics and judiciary. It was identified back then as an issue but I believe it is still an issue....it has to be doesn't it? Who else would cover for these types for the most part? We know that paedophiles are despised by even some of the most hardened criminals in gaol.
As for castration and chemical castration, whilst I would be very happy to see those things occur.....it is also at the forefront of my mind that it is very possible that whilst the desire may be taken away.....the mentality of that person is still there and there is an issue. One particular issue that springs to mind and has often crossed my mind with the William Tyrrell case is.....it is possible, actually very probable, that a person of this persuasion would also run a business along this line to (amongst other things) make money. The desire to make money and the connections that person would have would probably not diminish by age or castration. This also leads me to make the comment that if you were of that persuasion and happened upon a child that did not suit your particular needs.....you would damn well know someone who it would suit......and you would see an opportunity to make money out of it.
 
BBM

As it did in the Wood Royal Commission in the late 90s when they investigated the possibility of collusion in the ranks regarding paedophilia and the legal profession, the media, the police force, politics and judiciary. It was identified back then as an issue but I believe it is still an issue....it has to be doesn't it? Who else would cover for these types for the most part? We know that paedophiles are despised by even some of the most hardened criminals in gaol.
As for castration and chemical castration, whilst I would be very happy to see those things occur.....it is also at the forefront of my mind that it is very possible that whilst the desire may be taken away.....the mentality of that person is still there and there is an issue. One particular issue that springs to mind and has often crossed my mind with the William Tyrrell case is.....it is possible, actually very probable, that a person of this persuasion would also run a business along this line to (amongst other things) make money. The desire to make money and the connections that person would have would probably not diminish by age or castration. This also leads me to make the comment that if you were of that persuasion and happened upon a child that did not suit your particular needs.....you would damn well know someone who it would suit......and you would see an opportunity to make money out of it.

Adding to your post regarding money: another reason one might continue the hunt for children is for online fame in paedo-world and gratification from the challenge. Maybe their online life is the only world they feel accepted and proud in. With 'virtual friends' giving them a pat on the back.
 
Has anyone been watching 'Media Watch' on Aunty regarding the recent botched attempts at international retrievals of children abducted by non-custodial parents?

Episode 11, 11 April 2016, Hatching a Plan

'Journalists or child snatchers? 60 Minutes making news for all the wrong reasons.'

Episode 12, 18 April 2016, 60 Minutes in the dock

'A 60 Minutes crew are facing court over the bungled child recovery attempt, but it's not the first time tabloid TV has become involved in an international child custody dispute.'

Transcripts:

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/

I was amazed by how quickly children could be abducted; especially with the assistance of so-called 'child recovery experts'.

They reminded me of the 'Blackshirts' and their forays into this line of work on behalf of non-custodial fathers in family law disputes in the early 2000s:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-threat-to-fathers-in-blackshirts-185849.html

Perhaps something may have been organised by 'someone' who was disgruntled by William's custodial arrangements or their access to him? I'm not pointing fingers. I just think it's 'food for thought'.
 
This may be helpful in some respects regarding sentencing of child sexual offenders.

I found it during one of my frequent virtual visits to the Australian Institute of Criminology's online library:

Brief review of contemporary sexual offence and child sexual abuse legislation in Australia: 2015 update
Special report

Prepared by the Australian Institute of Criminology for the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse
Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology, March 2016
ISBN 978 1 922009 95 1
Hayley Boxall and Georgina Fuller

Link to extract and .pdf (1.5MB):

http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current series/special/1-20/010.html

'Introduction

In 2013, the Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) was contracted by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse (the Commission) to undertake a review of sexual offence legislation in Australia, particularly as it related to children. This review (Boxall, 2014) contained detailed information about all legislation that had been enacted as at 31 December 2013.

Since the initial report was published, a number of states and territories have revised or updated legislation pertaining to sexual offences in Australia. Therefore, in October 2015, the Commission contracted the AIC to update the previous review to encompass all legislation enacted as at 31 December 2015. Any legislative changes made after this date are not included in this review.

Key changes that have occurred since 31 December 2013 include;

Victoria:

changes have been made to the definition of sexual penetration (Crimes Act 1958);

inclusion of additional offences including ‘failure by a person in authority to protect child from sexual offence’ and

‘failure to disclose sexual offence committed against child under the age of 16 years’ (Crimes Act 1958);

New South Wales:

Crimes Act 1900 was amended to increase the penalty for ‘sexual intercourse - child under 10’ from 25 years to life imprisonment; and

Australian Capital Territory:

Crimes Act 1900 was amended to change the terminology from ‘child *advertiser censored*’ to ‘child exploitation material’.

Structure and scope of this report

This report provides a brief overview of the offences that an individual who sexually abuses a child in an institutional setting may be charged with at the end of 2015.

Information provided for each of the identified offences includes:

the location of the offence in the respective state or territory’s legislation;

the age of the victim (where relevant);

aggravating factors—for the purpose of this review, restricted to factors relating to:

the age of the child;

the relationship between the offender and victim; whether the victim has an intellectual impairment, physical disability or mental illness; and

the maximum penalty.

The offences included in this review have been divided into a six sections:

contact sexual offences where the child is below the legal age of consent (16, 17 or 18 years old depending on the jurisdiction and nature of the sexual act);

contact sexual offences where the child is above the legal age of consent;

contact sexual offences where the age of the victim is not specified;

non-contact sexual offences;

child *advertiser censored* offences (production); and

offences for which institutions and/or their representatives that were aware of child sexual abuse may be charged.

Consistent with the previous report, only offences related to individuals located within Australia are included in this review.'
 
Wexford and Richieswan.....

Totally agree that this is a possibility. Giving the example of the scumpond likes of McCoole in SA...to be a member of his international paedophile internet sharing site...members needed to provide evidence of new abuse of a different child on a monthly basis or be kicked out of their exclusive club....

A Paedophile with a desire of a specific age or gender could easily see any child simply as a commodity. ....

I said it it awhile ago....the only named POI so far that I can see that was that desperate to act so erratically is Tony Jones....He was already aware that he'd be facing at least 3 years...could he have had help....sure..could he have manipulated others of his same persuasions...yep....His criminal history shows that he could be an aggresive and intimidating individual.

IMO the only question in my mind that remains ....was there a finality. .....or was there a more sympathetic (Remember Paedophiles supposedly *Love* children)....was William ultimately passed on...???

My research so far suggests the numbers of people involved in Paedophile behaviour in Australia is so far out of the realms of us NORMAL.People ... (its not ok to physically/emotionally hurt children)......its so disgusting and beyond rational comprehension. ..and it does involve people within our judiciary.....police forces...politicians...

These ???.....what name do you give them?......look to the light sentencing...http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-11-12/gillard-launches-royal-commission-into-child-abuse/4367364

For those interested. ..look into who met with George Pell prior to to and during the construction of this royal commision....especially
Interesting who lied about about having meetings with Mr Pell before the start of the Commision .........why???

It sickens me that there are individual's out there that value the $$$ or their own sick sexual desires..sickness ahead of the welfare of babies. ..toddlers. ..children.....They try to justify..explain..rationalise??......seriously?


And if there is corruption. ....such an inadequate word in this instance...

Seriously hope that the thought..the word..karma is true!!!!!!..

If all is lost... I hope the groundswell. ...for wanting to know what has happened to William. ..is we have had enough!!!
 
It is very interesting to note that the bail conditions of reporting 3 times a week and having to live at Lake Cathie still stick on a case which is so many years old. If BS has been squeaky clean until now then why (and Im saying this based on how other cases have been managed, Im not diminishing in any way the nature of the charges) does he still have to report three times a week?? I would think if he is still a POI then there would be a big push to keep him very much where they could see him. I still feel these historic charges could be being used as an aid to the WT investigation more than any other purpose.

BBM, I would think it is par for the course seeing as he has been charged with the very serious allegations from a historic case from a long time ago. These are BS's conditions of bail to report x3 times per week, and he has to adhere to them as instructed by the court until such time as his case is tried in court and he is either found guilty of those charges or not guilty in which case it will determine his sentencing if found guilty, but if found innocent then i would imagine he will no longer have those previous bail conditions and will be free to carry on his life and exonerated from the crime he was charged with, and i do remember initially the judge stating it was a very weak case, so there's that.
I'm not sure i see how B.S. historic charges can be used as an aid in WT's investigation though?
 
Geez, you guys, William's abduction (and, now seemingly increasingly more likely death), is weighing heavily on my mind, and heart, after such a long time.

Maybe it's because it's my grandson's 5th birthday today and I saw the joy on his face when I gave him his present - a mini Iron Man suit (complete with muscles and a mask) and watched him 'fly' around my daughter's home. Sometimes when these milestones arrive they are bittersweet.

The sadness and hopelessness I feel regarding the evil that is, and has been, done to our most vulnerable is almost unbearable at times. Therefore, I am so grateful for all of you. No matter if we have 'strong differences of opinion' or 'outbursts of emotion'; you remind me that people care about each other. That is truly balm for my soul, so thank you from the bottom of my heart.
 
Sadly a lot of these types of crimes against children are committed in their own homes by a parent they should be able to trust. I say bring back the death penalty for anyone that violates an innocent child and maybe that's what Australians could petition for to their local representatives. There needs to be a zero tolerance in our society for it, and we are the only ones to try and bring about the changes we want to see. Paedophilia is not a mental illness IMO, it is just pure evil and there are no excuses for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
154
Guests online
4,154
Total visitors
4,308

Forum statistics

Threads
593,291
Messages
17,983,893
Members
229,080
Latest member
cLeopatra_
Back
Top