Australia Australia - William Tyrrell, 3, Kendall, Nsw, 12 Sept 2014 - #61

Status
Not open for further replies.
It seeems odd that in 7 months, the family had not visited FGM once, especially given FGM’s reported health and recent death of her husband. It suggests they are not very close. Not that there is anything wrong with that, it just seems strange. FGM seems a shadowy and passive figure in all of this which is at odds with the person she seems to have been irl. All JMO.
 
I would think that you are very wrong in your assumption. While there are some Forster carers who are 10/10 and some that are sorta ok (5/10) there are some absolute horror stories with horrible carers. It wouldn't be the first time a child has passed due to lack of supervision from Forster carers.

I was an older mother having had my first at 37 and my second at 40yo. But FFC and MFC were in their mid to late 40s when they became FPs. It could have been a real shock to them.

It was not easy keeping up with them at times but I was fit and looked and acted ten years younger than my age. My children were very well behaved generally. However, when they were very young, I worried that they could have ADHD as they seemed hyperactive. So I went to my GP for advice. While there my 2yo son even crawled up on to the doctor's desk! He advised me to put them on a special diet - no orange juice instead I had to give them pineapple or apple juice, no coca cola which I never gave them anyway and to reduce the sugar which they only had at parties so that was difficult. There was a special diet that I found to reduce hyperactivity in children which I followed. I never had problems with them after that.

Therefore, I can understand FFC not wanting them to have sweets as you can never get them to sleep after consuming them.
 
Last edited:
I had to have a little laugh at this - hiring a lawyer who defended the Comancheros!!! I have no doubt that the lawyer is excellent and that's why she hired him, but I'm not sure I would personally want to be associated with a lawyer defending hardened criminal bikies!
Obviously we don’t know much about what has occurred but they have put a dvo order on them subsequently charged - does a charge only happen after police interview or is this normal protocol for domestic violence? (As in no investigation or proof needed initially?)
 
Seems a bit extreme to hav such an expensive high profile lawyer who deals with major cases when its just a simple restraining order and simple abuse charge for a bruising, do they expect this to continue into WT murder so need him on board, you would think this guy would say he is to busy doing major cases to defend a petty restraining order and minor assault charge, obviously he is good and will be able to defend the charges and get them off but how will that look us people will know that it doesn't matter who committed the crime as the best lawyer in Australia will be able to defend and possibly win just so sus for a small thing like restraining order to get the biggest name in criminal law as your lawyer it says guilty to me, its just excessive i can see the cost of this lawyer is going to be major excessive to spend that on such minor charges but they hav money and can't risk a pattern of abuse if they were in fact abusive WT

It says guilty to me too. I wonder if they have bribed the horse to admit to the abuse!
 
She may be returned to Foster family .. they are fighting DVO .. at the moment she is with another foster family ..
Probably only a possibility (and a remote one at that), if
- the common assault charges against the FFC and MFC are unsuccessful; and
- the alleged victim of the common assault charges does not think she was assaulted (emotionally or physically) by either FFC or MFC; and
- someone not related to William's Foster family, credibly confesses to, or is convicted beyond a reasonable doubt, with crimes for the disappearance of William.
 
I just watched the FF walkthrough and he stated William had asthma and it would be too hard for him to walk up a hill. This seems odd when we were told he's been riding his bike and running and jumping around.
Ah yes asthma. I forgot.

Speculation here: is it possible he had an asthma attack whilst unsupervised and that's how he met his demise?
 
In case it helps anyone, and that includes me, I decided to transcribe some of Ep. 1 of the Where's William podcast. I'm not quite finished.

The children slept in separate bedrooms – WT with his MFC and FD with FFC.

The kids finished breakfast. FFC and the kids went outside to ride their bikes. The kids had been racing up and down the driveway while FFC and FFGM were watching on. FD suddenly stopped in the middle of the driveway because she saw a car that had driven past and she and FFC both took note of that car. FFC talks about that in her police statement.

FD said, “Who’s that car, mummy?” I looked out onto the road and saw a dark green, grey sedan drive past Mum’s house, up Benaroon Drive towards the M’s house next door. The car just nosed into the M’s driveway and then backed out of the driveway. I said to FD, ‘I don’t know. Probably the neighbour’. I said that because I thought that the Ms were home and I think they have a car that is sort of similar to that. The last time I saw the car was when it had turned around in the M’s driveway and had literally just started driving back down the street. The car looked like it was driving with a purpose as opposed to slowly driving along like someone was looking for something. I would have seen the car for less than 10 seconds from when I first saw it until I last saw it. I can’t remember whether the windows were down. I couldn’t see any of the occupants, but this time I turned my attention back towards FD riding the bike because she had started riding again.”

After the kids finished riding their bikes, they went back inside but after 10 mins, WT wanted to go back outside and play. FD stayed inside with FFGM. FFC took WT outside and they played Mummy Monsters before returning inside.

The-little-boy-in-the-spiderman-suit

Pays a lot of attention to what the car was doing but couldnt see the occupants? Looks to be pointing the finger at a strange car. So, this person driving up the street with a purpose, drives into someones driveway looking for children?? IS that what FM was implying? I do that all the time, get lost driving and then just nose into someones driveway to do a u turn
 
Imo William and his sister won the lottery as they were in a violent drug affected upbringing, thus the removal and landed in the hands of an affluent couple who put their all into those children's future.
Private schooling, overseas holidays and the very best therapists.

imo, unfortunately, I firmly believe someone like FA happened to cross paths with William while he stood outside waiting for his dads car.
The perp won’t confess but a bug/wire will tell all…one day
I agree. Not much has been said about that little piece of statement from the FD about William running to wait for Dad's car. And she said it to the female police officer not long after he disappeared. I think there were men in the neighbourhood for another purpose, but when William appeared at the road they took the opportunity to take him.
 
A "refresh" of the incident regarding the William as a baby and the Video Shop where they were seen by a FACS worker.



Brendan and Karlie began having domestic disputes and police were called to the home.

In June 2011, William was born and the conflict between the pair continued.

Both Brendan and Karlie were ordered to participate in a domestic violence course and to not associate with each other.

But when William was eleven months old, the two were spotted in each other’s company at a video store in the northwestern Sydney suburb of Ryde, where Karlie’s father lived.

An order by the Department of Family and Community Services (FACS) to remove William from the couples care “wasn’t because Brendan was taking drugs or drinking, he wasn’t”, Natalie said.

With Natalie’s help, Karlie and Brendan hid with William for three months in a granny flat.

When they were discovered, William was taken into foster care with a couple who lived on Sydney’s north shore.

Natalie said she, Karlie and Brendan spent around $4500 to try and retain custody of William.

“It cost a fortune, but [FACS] didn’t like Karlie or Brendan from the start.

“But for them, William wouldn’t be missing now.”

This was the foster couple caring for William when he vanished, from the home of the foster mother’s own mother.

The details of this arrangement were only revealed late last year, after the NSW Supreme Court overruled FACS and ordered William’s family history could be published.


William Tyrrell: Stunning new revelations about the day he vanished | The Chronicle

So I'm to assume FP already had LT before William? Because it doesn't make sense that BP would abscond with only William.

Generally, Children's Services (whatever they are called in various states and ministries) try to place siblings together.
 
L
IMO if the BM has not suffered any DVor taken drugs since the required number of years by FACS, the best place for bio children is with their bio parents as long as she wants to return there herself. The worst place for her to live now is with her FPs if they are found guilty.
The BM has recently been in trouble with police for spitting on them 3 times, hitting a female officer in the eye. Repeatedly calling them c@$*s in the presence of her other two very young children. She has a long record of assault.
She was pictured yesterday with a beer in her hand in the middle of the day.
WT and LT were removed due to DV by both BPs and drug use.
I wouldn't be quick to return her to the BMs care.
 
If the charges that have been laid of alleged assault on a FC in their care are dropped due to a not guilty verdict (for argument's sake) would it mean that the FC that was removed from their care would be returned if that was their wish? Or would said child not return or have a choice not to return to that family.

CPS decisions are “in the best interests of the child”. While an acquittal would be a factor, there are lots of other factors. It doesn’t take much for a child to be removed from foster care.
 
I had to have a little laugh at this - hiring a lawyer who defended the Comancheros!!! I have no doubt that the lawyer is excellent and that's why she hired him, but I'm not sure I would personally want to be associated with a lawyer defending hardened criminal bikies!

Why not? We defend all sorts, from the obviously guilty to wrongfully charged. I’ve defended bikies and people charged with not paying parking fines and everything in between. If lawyers decided to pick and choose who they represented based on moral judgments, most defendants would be unrepresented. That’s not justice.

If I was charged with a serious offence with a risk of jail, I’d want the toughest, most experienced, ruthless lawyer I could get. Lots of innocent people are convicted because they had a bad lawyer.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
234
Guests online
4,142
Total visitors
4,376

Forum statistics

Threads
592,333
Messages
17,967,593
Members
228,749
Latest member
knownstranger07
Back
Top