sosocurious
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2012
- Messages
- 6,374
- Reaction score
- 16,313
Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #39
- Thread starter Coldpizza
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
- Status
sosocurious
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2012
- Messages
- 6,374
- Reaction score
- 16,313
Inquest into the disappearance and suspected death of William Tyrrell.
Party name(s) Sen. Sgt Criag Lambert
Date 25 March 2019
Case No 2015/ 00029163
Hearing - NSW Coroners Court
Deputy H Grahame
Same info for 26 March 2019
Search NSW Court Lists | NSW Online Registry
Party name(s) Sen. Sgt Criag Lambert
Date 25 March 2019
Case No 2015/ 00029163
Hearing - NSW Coroners Court
Deputy H Grahame
Same info for 26 March 2019
Search NSW Court Lists | NSW Online Registry
Bohemian
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2015
- Messages
- 10,376
- Reaction score
- 16,604
Interesting. Wasn’t DS Lambert the colleague Jubes was said to have had a barney with last year?
drsleuth
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2012
- Messages
- 6,238
- Reaction score
- 38,609
sosocurious
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2012
- Messages
- 6,374
- Reaction score
- 16,313
Ditto.
So could it be that back in 2015 Det Sgt Lambert was the one who sent the initial suspected death referral to the coroner? No the lead would have to do that wouldn't they?
Bohemian
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2015
- Messages
- 10,376
- Reaction score
- 16,604
Yes, the OIC of the investigation AFAIK. I presumed this would have been Jubes, seeing as he was the lead detective for SFR.
sosocurious
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 5, 2012
- Messages
- 6,374
- Reaction score
- 16,313
Argh it is a toss up Hans Rupp or Jubes? It was first reported on the 29th that Jubes will NOW be in charge. From when? He was not a chief at the time it seems.
JANUARY 29 2015
Top investigator appointed in search for William Tyrrell
Detective Inspector Jubelin, .............. will now be the officer in charge following the retirement of Detective Inspector Hans Rupp.
Top investigator appointed in search for William Tyrrell
A spokesman for the NSW Coroner’s Court yesterday confirmed that the matter was referred by police on January 30. “There has been no formal request for an inquest and the coroner has been advised that the police investigation into the disappearance of William Tyrrell is ongoing,’’ the spokesman said.
Nocookies
Daniel Morcombe coroner has file on William Tyrrell case
SEPTEMBER 19, 2015
I was also surprised seeing a name other than David Laidlaw whom we were just informed would be "taking control of ... the crucial brief of evidence ahead of the Coronial inquest into his disappearance later this month", so I looked back and found an article from when that altercation occurred in August. I remember that the wording was confusing (for me at least) at the time, I wasn't sure if it was more inept reporting, or if GJ had been already removed from heading up the case at the time the article was written, or what.
"The two lead homicide detectives on the William Tyrrell case are set to undertake conflict resolution training after a heated argument got out of hand.
The officer-in-charge of the case, Detective Sergeant Craig Lambert and Detective Chief Inspector Gary Jubelin became involved in an altercation."
William Tyrrell clash: Lead detectives 'come to blows' during meeting about missing toddler | Daily Mail Online
sleepinoz
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2012
- Messages
- 8,634
- Reaction score
- 25,362
I think that Lambert is in charge of day to day stuff on SFR, Jubes was officer in charge but not his only case. I assume it's management from within Homicide IYKWIM.
Hope I'm explaining that correctly, Lambert is there everyday and reports to Jubes (now Laidlaw).
Hope I'm explaining that correctly, Lambert is there everyday and reports to Jubes (now Laidlaw).
Blues Clues
Former Member
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2018
- Messages
- 566
- Reaction score
- 4,451
After reading this from the piece shared earlier
I imagine it would be an enormous ask for David Laidlaw to be across the case in minute detail and perhaps this is the reason Craig Lambert is instead assisting counsel at the inquest?
Do we presume that the 'acting assistant commissioner' does not know what he's talking about then? (He is quoted below.)
On Friday, Acting Assistant Commissioner Stuart Smith said an allegation of misconduct was referred to the Professional Standards Command earlier this year, but rejected any suggestion that it would impact the upcoming inquest.
"There are 26 other investigators that have all worked on the William tyrrell strike force diligently ... the matter will proceed to inquest in the hands of the state's most senior homicide inspector David Laidlaw," he said.
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...or-denies-any-wrongdoing-20190301-p5112w.html
I would tend to think that the record posted from the court schedule is the information at hand at the time it was booked, and that they probably didn't change it. It is really not a vital piece of information as far as the scheduling goes, and as well, this situation was just made public in the past few days, so to me, it would be lightening speed (and therefore not likely) if the police had already informed the court of the change and the court had already had the time to change it? (Even if this change had been in the works for months, if they had changed it on a public court schedule, the press would have gotten wind of it, and all of this would have blown up much earlier, which I believe they wanted to avoid, otherwise they would have just let this all out of the bag at the time. jmo.)
SouthAussie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2012
- Messages
- 30,244
- Reaction score
- 185,832
Wow. Presumably they will still be able to use Jubes as a witness at the inquest.
This is a tough call for William's inquest. The timing is pretty terrible .....
We will probably have to wait for Jube's after-retirement-autobiography to find out what this is all about.
This is a tough call for William's inquest. The timing is pretty terrible .....
We will probably have to wait for Jube's after-retirement-autobiography to find out what this is all about.
Last edited:
purpleandgreen
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- May 12, 2015
- Messages
- 3,173
- Reaction score
- 9,736
Good to see you, SA.
Bohemian
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2015
- Messages
- 10,376
- Reaction score
- 16,604
Ditto x
Bohemian
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 6, 2015
- Messages
- 10,376
- Reaction score
- 16,604
Yet DCI Jubelin (along with a female colleague) attended the Directions Hearing in December last year. AFAIK he was the OIC of the investigation at that time.
Alternatively to this being a purely internal matter: I was thinking about the timing in relation to the inquest; would there have been prior discovery to the representatives of BS and PS of the evidence proposed to be presented? Suppose one of the lawyers looked over the evidence and noticed something obtained in a way that arguably should have required a warrant, but that formality was skipped. He might wish to challenge the use of the evidence at inquest, and the client might also decide to lodge a complaint against the officer. For example, say police examined someone's phone and when it was given back, it had a 'bug' in place. Jubelin said they were doing covert operations.
A complaint from a suspect obviously wouldn't also be a complaint about staff management issues. Possibly long-aggrieved staff, becoming aware of the suspect's complaint, saw it as an opportunity to make their own.
A complaint from a suspect obviously wouldn't also be a complaint about staff management issues. Possibly long-aggrieved staff, becoming aware of the suspect's complaint, saw it as an opportunity to make their own.
I imagine this matter was likely internal, because evidence needs to be signed off first - before it goes to suspect's representative. And not just by one officer.... There should be a chain of evidence. It would not be in Jube's best interest to turn something inadmissible over to suspect's lawyers... MOO though
Yes, confusing. It did say in recent MSM article(s) that he hopes to attend. Perhaps he just won't be the one presenting(?) evidence to the coroner on behalf of SFR, but will still attend?
"It is understood that Chief Inspector Jubelin hopes to attend the inquest, which was announced on the fourth anniversary of William's disappearance in September 2018."
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw...or-denies-any-wrongdoing-20190301-p5112w.html
In the same article it says GJ's matter(s) wasn't/weren't referred to Professional Standards until early this year.. so even though this 'stuff' has been going on for months, maybe it didn't become 'officially referred' until early January. That could be why he attended in December (presumably on behalf of NSW Police?). Not sure if that would then mean he would no longer be able to attend this round in March?
On Friday, Acting Assistant Commissioner Stuart Smith said an allegation of misconduct was referred to the Professional Standards Command earlier this year, but rejected any suggestion that it would impact the upcoming inquest.
That could very well be possible and would make sense timing-wise, with the 'directions hearing' having taken place in December, and GJ's matters bein forwarded to Professional standards 'early this year'. I would assume anyone called to answer questions at the inquest would be given 'disclosure' ahead of time, so perhaps that is what the hubbub about PS getting a lawyer in place was about?
sleepinoz
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2012
- Messages
- 8,634
- Reaction score
- 25,362
This has vanished off the list
Coroners court is listed up until 27th March and Williams inquest is no longer listed.
Could they have closed it, or moved it or something else?
- Status